I feel like both the narrative and the sandbox in which the narrative takes place are not quite big enough to sustain the highest aspirations of either. In previous GTA games, I've always felt that the stories were rather secondary to the world in which they took place, and in many ways, the "storyline" of a GTA game was simply a 50+ hour interactive tutorial on how to play in the sandbox that Rockstar had provided. GTA:SA seemed especially geared toward this idea in the later level as the game stopped being about CJ's personal struggle and more about "ok, this is how you fly a plane, ok this is how you use a jetpack." Luckily, I was always so delighted by the things that the sandbox allowed me to do, that I forgave the narrative for being a little silly in showing me how to get there.

In GTAIV, it seems clear that Rockstar aimed much higher in terms of the maturity and seriousness of the narrative experience, and as such they necessarily excluded certain things from the game world. A jet pack just doesn't make sense in Niko's world, and would have hurt the narrative experience. Still, the experientially "smaller" narrative necessarily creates a more restrained world, particularly when viewed through the "tutorial" lense of previous Rockstar approaches to narrative. The narrative is simply not big enough to support the "do anything" nature of previous GTA sandboxes.

More troubling for me is the converse issue--the liberty city sandbox, and the game world in which Niko lives is not quite big enough to support the grandest ambitions of GTA IV's narrative. Like several other commenters here, I too was startled by the things I couldn't do in GTA IV, but it wasn't jet packs or rainbow afros I was looking for. Once I got a hold of some guns I constantly found myself looking for non-violent ways to pass missions and came up short every time. "You mean I can't just shoot him in the leg? You mean I can't just scare him, let him go, and say I killed him, as I did with that Vlad mission? I have to beat this guy up for information? Can I just take him out drinking?"

The first few hours of GTA IV are perfect, and the game world perfectly supports the narrative. You want to go on a date? Liberty City has what you need. You want to chase a guy across rooftops, Liberty City allows you to scale building and run around on them. You want to choose not to kill this guy? Liberty City will let you do that too. But once the guns enter the mix, I found myself constrained by extremely similar gameplay experiences all over again-- drive here, kill this guy, escape cops. The recent interest in the MGS franchise should be proof that it is possible to offer greater (and non-violent) gameplay variety, and GTA IV's narrative would be perfect for this. I only wish the sandbox that we call Liberty City would have had equally grand ambitions.

I think that Rockstar very deliberately took steps away from the ludicrous fun of the previous games - such as ditching tanks, jet packs, pizza delivery missions, and weapon powerups hanging around your safehouse (just to name a few changes).  Rockstar has taken steps towards a more serious minded GTA franchise, and I think that effort would be wasted by throwing it all out the window to cater to the hardcore who-cares-about-the-story-it's-all-about-the-sandbox fan.

Rockstar would do us all a favor by pushing ahead and building upon the baby steps in GTAIV to create a new take and a new direction for the series.  We deserve more than old gameplay with a fresh coat of paint - innovate or die!  Whether that pisses off too many hardcore fans remains to be seen, but I think it will keep their creative juices flowing and push game development as a whole in a positive direction.  Take a chance, Rockstar - ever forward!

When I played the game after reading many, many reviews, I was surprised that I had the opposite reaction to the opening hours of the game than the one that many critics described. While most of them felt that the game had somewhat of a slow start, I actually thought the relatively non-violent beginning was the game's strongest part.

The further you got into the game, the less credible the set pieces became, the more stereotyped the characters and the less room for the central story of Niko and Roman. With the exception of the McReary missions, the game fell back on the standard structure of old GTA's: doing arbitrary missions to make money. That this was ostensibly to pay off Roman's debts was really far too shallow a motivation. Frankly, the stellar voice cast deserved a better script.

So I guess I'd like to see the series mature a lot more. wrshamilton is also right in saying that the game could do without the homophobia and misogyny.

I disagree with N'Gai's plan to make GTA a customisable or multi-faceted experience through DLC. Rockstar would be better off creating a spinoff series (either one that emphasises dramatic storytelling or one that focuses on the less serious elements of the series) than diluting the main game by creating a gameworld that plays host to such wildly diverging styles.

Rockstar exercised far more control over the story and message in IV.  While this created a satisfying and cohesive crime story it was at the expense of replayability, spontaineous occurances, and the urge to stray from the plot.  It was a good game but thus far it doesn't have the value that other recent noteworthy titles come with (COD4, MSG4.)

Also, it seems they simplified play, no doubt as a means of inticing new players.  That would seem to make business sense but I can't tell yet if this was a good thing or not.  Rockstar underwhelmed a lot of diehard fans who thought they would be getting a game that challenged their familiarity with the franchise.  Has the base been broadened at the expense of credibility amongst fans?

As N'Gai mentioned downloadable content might be the tonic this game needs now that the main story is done but to do this we must choose to support DLC.  This is a business model that is ripe for abuse and I think we should be careful in supporting it.  If a barebones version of GTA can achieve former depth with DLC and we gladly pay for it, just how little content is going to wind up on our future game disks?

Initially I loved GTAIV so much that I declared it the best GTA in the series. Now that I've completed the game and I looked back on that experience I realize that it lacks the charm of both GTA:VC and GTA:SA. Though almost every aspect of the game has been improved upon, expanded, and matured--I think that I (and a lot of journalist) were just very excited to finally have a new GTA (and in this generation). What if we were to take GTA:SA and gloss it over with the RAGE engine and experience it for the first time? Would be love it just the same?

I do really love Niko, but the seperation of some players moral desicions not to play as a vandal and obey laws (including obeying stop lights) is forced to change drastically during some of the missions. My Niko would never perform some of the required kills in some of the missions. It's a mix up and it's sort of an "Uncanny Valley" in terms of gameplay.

Also, I would like to add that I like N'Gai's idea to experiment with different emotions, eras, and desires with the varied expansions, but if an older one was introduced wouldnt that exclude Niko? But it would be a great exercise for Rockstar--it gets me excited at the prospect of GTAV.

It isn't ever all things to all people, and it's the illusion of universality that's holding it back, as well being the cause of most of its problematic politics.

From my own subjectivity, I can't imagine experiencing all the ways one can damage things in GTA IV and come away missing the ways that don't exist.  I understand that there are people who might list "no tanks" on a list of the game's negatives, but I have no comprehension of how their minds work. Do they hold a lack of tanks against every game set in a world where tanks exist?

While the various setting and tonal experimentations that N'Gai listed would be welcome, and many of them probably fun, the only variation I'd be really excited for is one with a female protagonist (and, ideally, some different writers who could be trusted to do one justice). Not just for the sake of being able to play a girl, but in an attempt to force the designers to break up the assumed ideology of jokes about homosexual penises and women as collectables.