inFAMOUS is the latest PS3 exclusive to hit shelves, and with it has come the usual slew of debate and chatter and fanboy ramblings. Enter Conrad Zimmerman, Samit Sarkar and Jim Sterling to cut through the crap and talk some bollocks about their experiences with the game. Thanks to E3, our review is going to be slightly late, but you can hear some initial thoughts on the game as we practice our camera faces for this week's video coverage.
Does inFAMOUS live up to its promise of making you feel like a badass? Does the much-lauded Karma System tear a player in twain with its sordid ballet of emotional dilemma? Do you get to shag a dog in it? All these questions and more are answered in this hastily and shakily captured video.
Jim Sterling serves as reviews editor for Destructoid.com, head of the Podtoid podcast, and produces a number of news stories, original features, one-of-a-kind videos. With his passionate argumentative style, controversial opinions, harsh delivery, and dedication to brutal honesty Sterling is a name that you can't help but recognize.
Likes
PS2, iPod Touch, Silent Hill 2, Metal Gear Solid, Dynasty Warriors 3
Meet the rest of the team
I don't really consider myself a fanboy, but still probably get slapped under that label. I find the game average to be honest. I've played far better sandbox games than this years ago. I expected something new and refreshing but it doesn't even beat out some of the simplest Spiderman(PC) games. The repetitive nature of the territory part does not help. The depth of the story is not so great either.
Very disappointing following the 2 years of hype, and the fact that Sucker Punch is behind it. But it's not a bad game. Frustrating, repetitive, and derivative? Absolutely. But still fun.
Reccomendation to everybody just starting it. Lvl up your health and lightining bolt first, it really helps. Also, if you lvl up mele then it's far from useless. Infamous is a flawed but fun game, it just plays great.
Exactly. Before starting one of the stupid surveillance equipment missions, I walked up to a woman who screams something at me to the effect of "There's surveillance equipment on my building, DEAL WITH IT!" I had been playing as a good guy up until that point, but after our little exchange, you could have probably used her ass as an outlet to run half of Neon City. Next time, I will definitely be playing through as an evil character.
I always choose the evil side I think it is much more fun....but maybe i am a fucked up person
But the moral choices don't do shit, i agree with jim on that. You have to care about the NPC's which it seems the companies except Value do not really spend any time on
I'm glad that the subject of Fable was brought up. My biggest gripe with the moral choices that game were the ones that were completely obvious given your chosen alignment. Rev Anthony's Rant from this week makes the exact point that I would have: the big choice in the prison over whether or not to kill the other prisoner is a no-brainer since the penalty for being good in that is almost completely negligible depending on how much side-questing your character did before that point in the game.
If devs really want me to have a morally gray character or force me to go against what I believe, they have to present the choices in ways that aren't completely obvious and/or totally irrelevant. I'm not sure if it should be chalked up to writing, planning, or programming, but someday soon I hope someone gets it right and we can all move along from there.
"It's hard to control, and jumping from window to window is tough"
I didn't find any problems at all. I find it smoother than Sly Cooper, actually
"It looks bad"
Eh? For Sucker Punch's first PS3 outing, I didn't find anything too wrong graphically. I think people are looking too far.
"It's too hard. The enemies are crack shots"
It's about time a game feels more realistic in terms of enemy AI. Obviously trained professionals would know how to shoot. You just have to use cover
Other than that, the repetition and lack of power complaints (and the custard-y glitches, lol) have a lot of merit, I feel. Hell, I even was bored of the demo missions! But what are you going to do really...I spent most of the game running around rooftops and just messing around. Also, I was expecting a lot more diversity in terms of powers, and good/bad storyline arcs. I agree 100% with an 8-8.5 range.
@ Balaamsafe
I second the powering up your lightning and health right away. It makes to game so much easier. It's like maxing multi-attack and time-stop in Fable 1. It's just overpowered.
The thing is I can see how repetitive it is. Like I know how binary all the choices are and how simplistic all the morals are. And I know how not super I feel most of the time.
I absolutely agree with them on the "lack of badassness" to the title. Having read reviews on 1up and IGN and other places talking about the level of power you had and what a satisfying experience it was, I was blown away by what a completely opposite experience I had with it. I started Infamous immediately after completing Wolverine, and it was a night and day experience. Sure Wolverine isn't a sandbox title, but even early on in that title you feel like an unstoppable killing machine. I go into Infamous, and really I felt extremely underpowered, and found myself thinking "man I'd love this so much more if it had Wolverine's lunging mechanic so I could get to those snipers without having to pull a Nathan Drake with the other the shoulder lock on bullshit." Not that I don't like Uncharted, I adore it, but playing a guy who controls electricity shouldn't have the same feel as playing as a normal bloke with a pistol.
And that gets into the derivative part. I myself haven't experienced any glitches, but I keep finding myself thinking "Okay, they stole the climbing mechanic from their own title Sly Cooper... Okay, the sandboxing feels like a mish mash of GTA and that horrible Transformers game from 2007... Okay, the aiming and melee mechanics feel ripped from Uncharted... Okay, the moral system feels like Fable" and on and on. So far there hasn't been a single element to this game that feels like an original concept. And frankly, I just don't get all the positive hype behind it at all. To me, and Jim could tell you I'm about as PS3 fanboy as it gets, this title falls into the Lair and Heavenly Sword levels of "doesn't live up to the advanced hype."
Playing evil all the way through is the only way to get any real enjoyment out of it, but that still doesn't make up for all the other things listed above.
It's not only that the choices are usually binary and uninteresting, I also hate when they've tied choices to your abilities. If I've been a complete douche the entire game and they finally put in a good choice I'd actually care about, I wouldn't do it because I'd be hindering my character's growth. Mass Effect was pretty good about this, you got new stuff whichever way you decided to go, and no matter how you played it you couldn't screw up your character based on choices made.
@Volomon - 8.0 is not an average game. You are thinking 5.0 - 6.0.
The obviousness of the moral choices just seems to be a dress up for the two different ways to play the game. As far as I know, nothing else has an effect on your karma so it is basically a way of setting up the good/evil option.
I would give it a 7.5. The game is definitely flawed but it is still fun enough to play twice.
I think the main way to play the game and avoid being "surrounded by twenty guys" is to stick to the high ground and position yourself well.
Having to do this does taking away from the badassness but you feel it in another way, when you get the upgraded exploding shot, the time-slowing sniper shot, and enough battery power to exploit the grenades you feel like a bad ass.
Also, it's so easy to find a place to recharge (which also heals you) most of the time, that I don't see the lack of endurance as a problem.
"It's hard to control, and jumping from window to window is tough"
I didn't find any problems at all. I find it smoother than Sly Cooper, actually
-It's not hard to control, it's too clingy.
"It looks bad"
Eh? For Sucker Punch's first PS3 outing, I didn't find anything too wrong graphically. I think people are looking too far.
-This came out on the PS3, the most powerful system of all time, over THREE years into its life. This game should look as good as anything else on the market right now, and it doesn't. By any means.
"It's too hard. The enemies are crack shots"
It's about time a game feels more realistic in terms of enemy AI. Obviously trained professionals would know how to shoot. You just have to use cover
-They're not trained professionals. They're drug addicts and homeless people who got caught in an explosion. Did you even play this game? The enemies' difficulty is fucking FRUSTRATION personified.
Actually there are other things besides moral choices that affect your karma. If you run into an area with a ton of reapers, you can run around like a complete wuss hiding behind shit and taking pot shots at them to weed them down enough where you can run in and melee them without fear of being shot ten times in two seconds (which gets back to what I said about it feeling like Uncharted) or you can blow up a car or use a more powerful attack to decimate them, but if you do that you'll kill innocent civilians just standing around instead of logically running away, because they're only there to potentialy add to your negative karma.
I also agree with how the ease of climbing can be a detractor. I especially noticed it early on in the train mission. I'd be on top of the train, and I needed to hop down and kill some guys hiding behind rubble to the side of the train, but whether I tried to jump off the train or just step off, I'd automatically cling to the side of the train and get shot twice while fighting with the game's controls just trying to get him to let go of the effing train.
As for the graphics, there's a lot of texture and distance pop in, Everything looks the same everywhere you go, so you have to rely on specific points of recognition to even know where you are (like a theater sign for instance) and so on. Hell for the most part, it feels like your character's yellow biker jacket and your lightning attacks are the only ounces of non gray color to the game.
And why is it that Namco and Team Ninja seem to be the only designers out there who can handle 60 frames per second in this generation? I heard even God of War was going to be 30 fps this time around.
Whatever Mag said, he summed up my impessions of the game beautifully, the A.I is amazing, and seriously, I thank sucker punch for making a game that is actually challenging to play, enough of the easy difficulty, make me feel like my money is well spent. In this case, it is.
We gamers complain about how game have become easy, and when a game arrives with decent to great A.I and forces you to use your skills as a gamer effectively in order to survive, we complain even more. This isn't aimed at the grammar master Sarkar, rather at the people bitching about how inFamous is too hard. Man up, just because you play games for years doesn't mean you will automatically become awesome at a particular game.
'when you get the upgraded exploding shot, the time-slowing sniper shot, and enough battery power to exploit the grenades you feel like a bad ass'
Having good difficulty is one thing, again, like in Uncharted, where you can clearly see all the guys attacking you, but you have to figure out a strategy that will allow you to take them out without being out in the open and exposed to too many attackers at once.
What they're saying with this game is somewhat different. The train level again is a good example. I could be standing on top of the train, and all of a sudden I'd get hit fur or five times from targets that weren't even visible until two or three seconds later when they'd come into view. That's not difficulty, that's bad game design.
A perfect example of what I mean is Bionic Commando. The original was a difficult game on the strength of where enemies were placed, and mastering the arm enough to be able to figure out how to take them out, how to get where you needed to go, etc. In the new title, the designers added these radiation zones throughout the levels where if you go too high, or try to go a direction the designers don't want you going, the screen turns red and you die instantly. And there's no visible cue to let you know that area is radiated, so not only does it make the game totally linear but it forces you to have to play each level over and over until you find the one safe path through the level.
It's not true game difficulty, it's bad game design, just like being shot twenty times from targets you can't even see because they're on rooftops 300 yards away but can somehow still see you.
@craig
Regarding the controls being "too clingy": that's not the complains I've seen with various media outlets. They're saying the controls aren't clingy enough, to which you just backed me up.
Did you even play this game? The enemies' difficulty is fucking FRUSTRATION personified. I just think you need to play a few action games to practice up before beating the game, and take a chill pill.
Also, I misspoke when I said trained professionals: I meant biologically enhanced enemies that should be capable of accurate fire. My point was they're not normal enemies. Just use cover, or stick entirely to the roof-tops: you'll be fine.
Why do developers keep try to force in the whole morality into video games. Without real co sequnces what's the point? If I do something morally questionable in life the consequence might be guilt or regret. I think it's difficult to create this feeling on games methinks. Sometimes you're even rewarded for evil actions.
Anyway the game is ok kinds fun. It starts off kinda meh but then picks up steam as you go. I'm not sure it's a $60 game but ill pick it up when it's down
to $30.
I think a lot of people are confusing "badass" with "invincible". You can be a badass and still be in danger of having it handed to you. I think inFamous manages that quite well.
Good video overall, but there is one issue that hurts it. Jim, in the discussion of the game's bugs, it was a poor analogy to say that you fell through the ground as if it were custard. Custard, sir, is a non-Newtonian liquid, and becomes more viscous under pressure (of, say, a human). It is therefore quite difficult to fall through custard.
You as a Briton should certainly be aware of this (granted, you live in America, but so do I), as it was featured in an episode of QI.
One of the.. I think it's the second to last choice, not spoiling, but it's a bit shit. Why? Because the game magically changes the situation regardless of what you choose to make something happen, even if you want to prevent it. It's rather stupid.
@zeroword Average as in the average game that comes out. I'm not to sure that readily transfers to game scores, because clearly the average game isn't rated 5.0. I'm not going to do a math problem to see what the average really is but, you hopefully get my point.
its hard ? really, I breezed through it, didnt even need the shield. Any way I felt the good and evil aspects were spot on, this might be because I live in NY but if something like that happend right now I can see people behaving just like that, but honestly its gonna be hard making some evil choices during my next playthrough , ( some of those choices were just soul less blackhearted bastard evil). I did notice a few pop ups though and considering this is the most powerful console to date thats rather unacceptable (however I never fell through the street). and the side missions do get repetitive after a while but no open world game has really avoided that so not surprised there.
however I'd give this game a 9, its just thst fun, the story is great, the atmosphere is fantastic,the game does a great job of making you feel super powered ( not invincible ) and the moral aspect though predictable is done incredibly well, I cant remember the last time a game had given me moral choices I actually had to give some thought to.
So if you're gonna complain about morality, complain about fallout 3 too. It doesn't matter what you do, the story is the same basically. The only difference between good/evil is the dialogue. In terms of gameplay, it seems you guys just suck at the game. I played through the game on hard and guess what? it is hard but not frustratingly hard. Enemies take cover, they move, what do you want? you want them to stand there and take your punishment?
Considering most of the enemies in the game has powers too, you're not going to feel invincible but you still are a superhero. I agree that there are some stupid side missions but every open world game has that. What this game gets right that other open world games don't is the shooting mechanics. Finally, a game where you can shoot anytime, anywhere and from any hand.
The game is jaggy as hell but it still looks worlds better than Saints row 2 and the fact that there is more action in this game than any other of its kind,makes up for the pop up.
Not everyone is going to enjoy every game that gets a good score. People have different tastes but from that little clip it seems people don't like the game because its hard. Here is a hint, there's a cover system AND there's a map that tells you exactly where enemies are... use it. OR play EASY mode.
Seriously, if you're looking for a good non-stop action game, this is it. Don't even bother doing side missions. Just fight your way to make it to the next story mission marker. If you're looking for a moral system look at fallout or fable cuz I do agree, the moral system in this game sucks. I really don't care about the characters but I do enjoy the powers.
PS. Thunder drop rocks. You can pull it off from a tiny jump and it'll stop the enemies from shooting a second, which will give you an opportunity to either run away or head shot them FYI.
inFAMOUS is a really fun game but the moral choice thing doesn't really work for me. I mean sure you can play the other side and you get different electrical augmentations and 15 more missions but really there is no grey areas, no tough choices. You can either be a hero or a self centered prick. There is no reason to be particularly bad, I think they threw it in there so misanthropes can enjoy the game too.
Agreed, playing as a good guy is the tougher side of things though since you cant go on rampages. The moral decisions are very light, though they do sort of make sense. For a game that I was wholely uninterested in up until the demo I got to say I am pleasantly surprised by how much fun I am having though. For all the flaws it might have it is at the very least genuinely fun to play. Yes your not that strong at the start of the game and if you don't play right you will die but that adds a little vulnerability to your character since when played well you are nearly unstoppable. Especially in some later missions where you get unlimited ammo if you get what I mean ;)
What I love about inFAMOUS is that it's fucking solid. I don't think there is anything in the game that could be considered subpar; it's all done very well, despite its cliché storyline. It's not revolutionary, it's just a really good game.
The Megawatt Hammer is also the coolest power in any video game, ever. On the Good side, you can shoot them in the air and use an electric shock on your opponent. They will then strike downwards onto them.
Also, I like it better than GTAIV because it doesn't have so much bullshit. When someone calls me I don't need to rush off and do whatever the fuck to make them like me, which is really great.
I love infamous, I think its fantastic and I'm more emotionally involved in this main character than I was in GTA4 or Fallout 3. This game I feel like a superhero, even though its quite easy to die, I feel so powerful when Im shoot lighting bolts at people and using that push attack. I hate open world games, I love a linear path but this game (and Burnout paradise) is the very rare exception. I love traveling on the power lines and climbing on everything, it is such an exhilarating experience that I have not felt in an open world game since the first 4 hours of Assassins Creed. Infamous is great in my opinion and I would give this 9 out 10. Like all games its not perfect but what it does in it excels at.
i personally think the game fucking rocks. And I personally think its alot better than alot of other sandbox games we've seen lately. And yes, I'll say it. inFamous > GTA4
The reasons you said made you not like the game so much are the reasons I like the game. I like the challenging enemies, playing on hard. And aside from a few graphical glitches it's been very enjoyable. I agree that in the begining you don't feel like a badass but later in the game as you unlock your powers, especially lightning storm I feel like a badass. It's not the best sandbox superhero game ever but it's damn enjoyable.
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
10:00 AM on 05.31.2009
| 
Disappointed I'd give it an 8.0.
But the moral choices don't do shit, i agree with jim on that. You have to care about the NPC's which it seems the companies except Value do not really spend any time on
That I always pictured Samit to be way skinner
If devs really want me to have a morally gray character or force me to go against what I believe, they have to present the choices in ways that aren't completely obvious and/or totally irrelevant. I'm not sure if it should be chalked up to writing, planning, or programming, but someday soon I hope someone gets it right and we can all move along from there.
"It's hard to control, and jumping from window to window is tough"
I didn't find any problems at all. I find it smoother than Sly Cooper, actually
"It looks bad"
Eh? For Sucker Punch's first PS3 outing, I didn't find anything too wrong graphically. I think people are looking too far.
"It's too hard. The enemies are crack shots"
It's about time a game feels more realistic in terms of enemy AI. Obviously trained professionals would know how to shoot. You just have to use cover
Other than that, the repetition and lack of power complaints (and the custard-y glitches, lol) have a lot of merit, I feel. Hell, I even was bored of the demo missions! But what are you going to do really...I spent most of the game running around rooftops and just messing around. Also, I was expecting a lot more diversity in terms of powers, and good/bad storyline arcs. I agree 100% with an 8-8.5 range.
@ Balaamsafe
I second the powering up your lightning and health right away. It makes to game so much easier. It's like maxing multi-attack and time-stop in Fable 1. It's just overpowered.
The thing is I can see how repetitive it is. Like I know how binary all the choices are and how simplistic all the morals are. And I know how not super I feel most of the time.
But theres still fun in there.
And that gets into the derivative part. I myself haven't experienced any glitches, but I keep finding myself thinking "Okay, they stole the climbing mechanic from their own title Sly Cooper... Okay, the sandboxing feels like a mish mash of GTA and that horrible Transformers game from 2007... Okay, the aiming and melee mechanics feel ripped from Uncharted... Okay, the moral system feels like Fable" and on and on. So far there hasn't been a single element to this game that feels like an original concept. And frankly, I just don't get all the positive hype behind it at all. To me, and Jim could tell you I'm about as PS3 fanboy as it gets, this title falls into the Lair and Heavenly Sword levels of "doesn't live up to the advanced hype."
Playing evil all the way through is the only way to get any real enjoyment out of it, but that still doesn't make up for all the other things listed above.
The obviousness of the moral choices just seems to be a dress up for the two different ways to play the game. As far as I know, nothing else has an effect on your karma so it is basically a way of setting up the good/evil option.
I would give it a 7.5. The game is definitely flawed but it is still fun enough to play twice.
I'll be waiting for prototype.
Having to do this does taking away from the badassness but you feel it in another way, when you get the upgraded exploding shot, the time-slowing sniper shot, and enough battery power to exploit the grenades you feel like a bad ass.
Also, it's so easy to find a place to recharge (which also heals you) most of the time, that I don't see the lack of endurance as a problem.
I didn't find any problems at all. I find it smoother than Sly Cooper, actually
-It's not hard to control, it's too clingy.
"It looks bad"
Eh? For Sucker Punch's first PS3 outing, I didn't find anything too wrong graphically. I think people are looking too far.
-This came out on the PS3, the most powerful system of all time, over THREE years into its life. This game should look as good as anything else on the market right now, and it doesn't. By any means.
"It's too hard. The enemies are crack shots"
It's about time a game feels more realistic in terms of enemy AI. Obviously trained professionals would know how to shoot. You just have to use cover
-They're not trained professionals. They're drug addicts and homeless people who got caught in an explosion. Did you even play this game? The enemies' difficulty is fucking FRUSTRATION personified.
I also agree with how the ease of climbing can be a detractor. I especially noticed it early on in the train mission. I'd be on top of the train, and I needed to hop down and kill some guys hiding behind rubble to the side of the train, but whether I tried to jump off the train or just step off, I'd automatically cling to the side of the train and get shot twice while fighting with the game's controls just trying to get him to let go of the effing train.
As for the graphics, there's a lot of texture and distance pop in, Everything looks the same everywhere you go, so you have to rely on specific points of recognition to even know where you are (like a theater sign for instance) and so on. Hell for the most part, it feels like your character's yellow biker jacket and your lightning attacks are the only ounces of non gray color to the game.
And why is it that Namco and Team Ninja seem to be the only designers out there who can handle 60 frames per second in this generation? I heard even God of War was going to be 30 fps this time around.
We gamers complain about how game have become easy, and when a game arrives with decent to great A.I and forces you to use your skills as a gamer effectively in order to survive, we complain even more. This isn't aimed at the grammar master Sarkar, rather at the people bitching about how inFamous is too hard. Man up, just because you play games for years doesn't mean you will automatically become awesome at a particular game.
'when you get the upgraded exploding shot, the time-slowing sniper shot, and enough battery power to exploit the grenades you feel like a bad ass'
Yes, yes you do. :)
What they're saying with this game is somewhat different. The train level again is a good example. I could be standing on top of the train, and all of a sudden I'd get hit fur or five times from targets that weren't even visible until two or three seconds later when they'd come into view. That's not difficulty, that's bad game design.
A perfect example of what I mean is Bionic Commando. The original was a difficult game on the strength of where enemies were placed, and mastering the arm enough to be able to figure out how to take them out, how to get where you needed to go, etc. In the new title, the designers added these radiation zones throughout the levels where if you go too high, or try to go a direction the designers don't want you going, the screen turns red and you die instantly. And there's no visible cue to let you know that area is radiated, so not only does it make the game totally linear but it forces you to have to play each level over and over until you find the one safe path through the level.
It's not true game difficulty, it's bad game design, just like being shot twenty times from targets you can't even see because they're on rooftops 300 yards away but can somehow still see you.
Regarding the controls being "too clingy": that's not the complains I've seen with various media outlets. They're saying the controls aren't clingy enough, to which you just backed me up.
Did you even play this game? The enemies' difficulty is fucking FRUSTRATION personified.
I just think you need to play a few action games to practice up before beating the game, and take a chill pill.
Also, I misspoke when I said trained professionals: I meant biologically enhanced enemies that should be capable of accurate fire. My point was they're not normal enemies. Just use cover, or stick entirely to the roof-tops: you'll be fine.
Anyway, I hope there are much more of these!
Anyway the game is ok kinds fun. It starts off kinda meh but then picks up steam as you go. I'm not sure it's a $60 game but ill pick it up when it's down
to $30.
You as a Briton should certainly be aware of this (granted, you live in America, but so do I), as it was featured in an episode of QI.
Basically its not worthy of the insane praise.
however I'd give this game a 9, its just thst fun, the story is great, the atmosphere is fantastic,the game does a great job of making you feel super powered ( not invincible ) and the moral aspect though predictable is done incredibly well, I cant remember the last time a game had given me moral choices I actually had to give some thought to.
Considering most of the enemies in the game has powers too, you're not going to feel invincible but you still are a superhero. I agree that there are some stupid side missions but every open world game has that. What this game gets right that other open world games don't is the shooting mechanics. Finally, a game where you can shoot anytime, anywhere and from any hand.
The game is jaggy as hell but it still looks worlds better than Saints row 2 and the fact that there is more action in this game than any other of its kind,makes up for the pop up.
Not everyone is going to enjoy every game that gets a good score. People have different tastes but from that little clip it seems people don't like the game because its hard. Here is a hint, there's a cover system AND there's a map that tells you exactly where enemies are... use it. OR play EASY mode.
Seriously, if you're looking for a good non-stop action game, this is it. Don't even bother doing side missions. Just fight your way to make it to the next story mission marker. If you're looking for a moral system look at fallout or fable cuz I do agree, the moral system in this game sucks. I really don't care about the characters but I do enjoy the powers.
PS. Thunder drop rocks. You can pull it off from a tiny jump and it'll stop the enemies from shooting a second, which will give you an opportunity to either run away or head shot them FYI.
The Megawatt Hammer is also the coolest power in any video game, ever. On the Good side, you can shoot them in the air and use an electric shock on your opponent. They will then strike downwards onto them.
Also, I like it better than GTAIV because it doesn't have so much bullshit. When someone calls me I don't need to rush off and do whatever the fuck to make them like me, which is really great.