Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Do you think that R* Made the right move?

23 replies to this topic
NuggetDog9
  • NuggetDog9

    Fiat Grande Punto 1.4 Dynamic Sport 5 Door

  • Awaiting Authorization
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2008

#1

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:56 AM

Do you think that R* made the best move sticking with LC?

makiaveli777
  • makiaveli777

    Keep ya head up

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 01 Apr 2008

#2

Posted 12 May 2008 - 11:59 AM

QUOTE (NuggetDog9 @ May 12 2008, 11:56)
Do you think that R* made the best move sticking with LC?

yes but i think they could add some more to get the ''new york feel'' like more shops and more peds

NuggetDog9
  • NuggetDog9

    Fiat Grande Punto 1.4 Dynamic Sport 5 Door

  • Awaiting Authorization
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2008

#3

Posted 12 May 2008 - 12:00 PM

I've noticed that alot of people prefered VC.

Zaderej
  • Zaderej

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 May 2008

#4

Posted 12 May 2008 - 01:24 PM

I miss SA! mad.gif

Will6969
  • Will6969

    GTA4 FTW!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2008

#5

Posted 12 May 2008 - 02:33 PM

More stores to enter would have made things a whole lot better. There's so many restaurants and buildings that have the potential to be really fun places to hang out in when playing, or just places to cause havoc in.

More pedestrians would have gave LC more of a NYC feeling as well, there's nowhere near the amount of people walking around LC like you'd usually see in NYC in the middle of Times Square/The Triangle for example.

But overall, yes. I think they made a great move, this is what they visioned Liberty City to be like in the first place when they made GTA III, but they couldn't capture the feeling they wanted due to the fact that they didn't have the processing power that the PS3/Xbox consoles have now. The PS2 was a great system, but it just couldn't produce anything close to what the new Liberty City throws at you.

mixmaster
  • mixmaster

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 May 2008

#6

Posted 12 May 2008 - 03:19 PM

sure , no problem with IV being their take on NYC

where R* may have made a big mistake , after reading all the whine and cheese posts about this not in this left out etc is making this not exclusive to PS3 like all the other titles, they have publicly said they had to make the xbox version first and convert to PS3 (was one reason for delay) because if they did it the other way too much would have to be cut and changed

NuggetDog9
  • NuggetDog9

    Fiat Grande Punto 1.4 Dynamic Sport 5 Door

  • Awaiting Authorization
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2008

#7

Posted 12 May 2008 - 03:20 PM

QUOTE (Will6969 @ May 12 2008, 15:33)
More stores to enter would have made things a whole lot better. There's so many restaurants and buildings that have the potential to be really fun places to hang out in when playing, or just places to cause havoc in.

More pedestrians would have gave LC more of a NYC feeling as well, there's nowhere near the amount of people walking around LC like you'd usually see in NYC in the middle of Times Square/The Triangle for example.

But overall, yes. I think they made a great move, this is what they visioned Liberty City to be like in the first place when they made GTA III, but they couldn't capture the feeling they wanted due to the fact that they didn't have the processing power that the PS3/Xbox consoles have now. The PS2 was a great system, but it just couldn't produce anything close to what the new Liberty City throws at you.

Im going to give you a cookie for that post. cookie.gif cookie.gif

Coltrane's Muse
  • Coltrane's Muse

    From the Ashes, I Arise....

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008

#8

Posted 12 May 2008 - 03:24 PM

QUOTE (NuggetDog9 @ May 12 2008, 11:56)
Do you think that R* made the best move sticking with LC?

Without a doubt, although I believe the omission of both Staten Island (the ferry would have been quite the diversion) and Long Island is somewhat peculiar.

RONIN1191
  • RONIN1191

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2008

#9

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:02 PM

QUOTE (mixmaster @ May 12 2008, 10:19)
sure , no problem with IV being their take on NYC

where R* may have made a big mistake , after reading all the whine and cheese posts about this not in this left out etc is making this not exclusive to PS3 like all the other titles, they have publicly said they had to make the xbox version first and convert to PS3 (was one reason for delay) because if they did it the other way too much would have to be cut and changed

That wasn't R*'s fault; that was Sony's. They didn't want to pay for the exclusive rights...what, R* is just supposed to GIVE it to them? That's ridiculous; if you believe that they should have, you also are ridiculous. Its about money, might as well get used to the idea.

Regarding this: "they have publicly said they had to make the xbox version first and convert to PS3 (was one reason for delay)"

Need you to back that up with a link, player.

NuggetDog9
  • NuggetDog9

    Fiat Grande Punto 1.4 Dynamic Sport 5 Door

  • Awaiting Authorization
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2008

#10

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:04 PM

QUOTE (RONIN1191 @ May 12 2008, 17:02)
QUOTE (mixmaster @ May 12 2008, 10:19)
sure , no problem with IV being their take on NYC

where R* may have made a big mistake , after reading all the whine and cheese posts about this not in this left out etc is making this not exclusive to PS3 like all the other titles, they have publicly said they had to make the xbox version first and convert to PS3 (was one reason for delay) because if they did it the other way too much would have to be cut and changed

That wasn't R*'s fault; that was Sony's. They didn't want to pay for the exclusive rights...what, R* is just supposed to GIVE it to them? That's ridiculous; if you believe that they should have, you also are ridiculous. Its about money, might as well get used to the idea.

Regarding this: "they have publicly said they had to make the xbox version first and convert to PS3 (was one reason for delay)"

Need you to back that up with a link, player.

Please dont start an argument. suicidal.gif

DDR Midian
  • DDR Midian

    <3 Banshee

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2004

#11

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:05 PM

QUOTE (RONIN1191 @ May 12 2008, 16:02)
QUOTE (mixmaster @ May 12 2008, 10:19)
sure , no problem with IV being their take on NYC

where R* may have made a big mistake , after reading all the whine and cheese posts about this not in this left out etc is making this not exclusive to PS3 like all the other titles, they have publicly said they had to make the xbox version first and convert to PS3 (was one reason for delay) because if they did it the other way too much would have to be cut and changed

That wasn't R*'s fault; that was Sony's. They didn't want to pay for the exclusive rights...what, R* is just supposed to GIVE it to them? That's ridiculous; if you believe that they should have, you also are ridiculous. Its about money, might as well get used to the idea.

Regarding this: "they have publicly said they had to make the xbox version first and convert to PS3 (was one reason for delay)"

Need you to back that up with a link, player.

http://www.gamasutra...php?story=14971

Bit of a crappy website, but the article is correct.

NarcoPolo
  • NarcoPolo

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 May 2008

#12

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:06 PM

it should have been london. but still fantastic neways. Shifty41s_beerhatsmilie2.gif

Mad Tony
  • Mad Tony

    Commisioner

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jan 2008

#13

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:09 PM

Well, although they stuck with Liberty City, it's kind of a different city entirely. So yeah, I'm happy with what we got because it was an entirely new city.

Jay
  • Jay

    1984 - 2011

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2004

#14

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:10 PM

QUOTE (NuggetDog9 @ May 12 2008, 21:30)
I've noticed that alot of people prefered VC.

You say that as if R* won't even return to Vice City...

Electricnexus
  • Electricnexus

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2008

#15

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:14 PM

I do. However, I think it's about time we saw some English cities. London anyone?

Starion
  • Starion

    hmm..

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2005

#16

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:16 PM

QUOTE (Electricnexus @ May 12 2008, 17:14)
I do. However, I think it's about time we saw some English cities. London anyone?

The Getaway anyone?

NuggetDog9
  • NuggetDog9

    Fiat Grande Punto 1.4 Dynamic Sport 5 Door

  • Awaiting Authorization
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2008

#17

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:18 PM

QUOTE (Jayzamann @ May 12 2008, 17:10)
QUOTE (NuggetDog9 @ May 12 2008, 21:30)
I've noticed that alot of people prefered VC.

You say that as if R* won't even return to Vice City...

I think with how many fans love VC.
I believe that R* May return with VC based in the 80's again but with the Europhia Engine and improved graphics etc.
VC was a big success no doubt.
I personally loved the world of VC and the main character.

RONIN1191
  • RONIN1191

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2008

#18

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:24 PM

All it says is the game was delayed due to the PS3 version not being ready at the previous launch...nowhere does it say it HAD to do the 360 version then port it to PS3. Also, the contractual obligation TT had with Sony precluded 360 owners from getting the game when it WAS ready. Still not reading that as 'it had to be done first because if it were done the other way, it would've failed'.

The delay occurred because the PS3 version of the game was not ready at the original launch date. Nuff said.

Edited to add: I HOPE and PRAY they return to 80s era Vice City ftw.

NuggetDog9
  • NuggetDog9

    Fiat Grande Punto 1.4 Dynamic Sport 5 Door

  • Awaiting Authorization
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2008

#19

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:26 PM

QUOTE (RONIN1191 @ May 12 2008, 17:24)
All it says is the game was delayed due to the PS3 version not being ready at the previous launch...nowhere does it say it HAD to do the 360 version then port it to PS3. Also, the contractual obligation TT had with Sony precluded 360 owners from getting the game when it WAS ready. Still not reading that as 'it had to be done first because if it were done the other way, it would've failed'.

The delay occurred because the PS3 version of the game was not ready at the original launch date. Nuff said.

Edited to add: I HOPE and PRAY they return to 80s era Vice City ftw.

I agree with the VC bit.
It'd be awesome with the new Europhia etc.

Coltrane's Muse
  • Coltrane's Muse

    From the Ashes, I Arise....

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008

#20

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:28 PM

QUOTE (NuggetDog9 @ May 12 2008, 16:26)
QUOTE (RONIN1191 @ May 12 2008, 17:24)
All it says is the game was delayed due to the PS3 version not being ready at the previous launch...nowhere does it say it HAD to do the 360 version then port it to PS3.  Also, the contractual obligation TT had with Sony precluded 360 owners from getting the game when it WAS ready.  Still not reading that as 'it had to be done first because if it were done the other way, it would've failed'.

The delay occurred because the PS3 version of the game was not ready at the original launch date.  Nuff said.

Edited to add:  I HOPE and PRAY they return to 80s era Vice City ftw.

I agree with the VC bit.
It'd be awesome with the new Europhia etc.

To hell with the eighties; the nineteen seventies would be a far better era in which to set a spin-off title.

strimx
  • strimx

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2007

#21

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:32 PM

QUOTE (Zaderej @ May 12 2008, 15:24)
I miss SA! mad.gif

so why dont you go ant play it...

_Camo
  • _Camo

    thunderspork

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2008

#22

Posted 12 May 2008 - 04:58 PM

I'm glad they did, we've had beaches, mountains, now a huge city again.

It's great.

RONIN1191
  • RONIN1191

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2008

#23

Posted 12 May 2008 - 05:03 PM

QUOTE (Coltrane's Muse @ May 12 2008, 11:28)
QUOTE (NuggetDog9 @ May 12 2008, 16:26)
QUOTE (RONIN1191 @ May 12 2008, 17:24)
All it says is the game was delayed due to the PS3 version not being ready at the previous launch...nowhere does it say it HAD to do the 360 version then port it to PS3.  Also, the contractual obligation TT had with Sony precluded 360 owners from getting the game when it WAS ready.  Still not reading that as 'it had to be done first because if it were done the other way, it would've failed'.

The delay occurred because the PS3 version of the game was not ready at the original launch date.  Nuff said.

Edited to add:  I HOPE and PRAY they return to 80s era Vice City ftw.

I agree with the VC bit.
It'd be awesome with the new Europhia etc.

To hell with the eighties; the nineteen seventies would be a far better era in which to set a spin-off title.

Yea, I would've liked to see a LC set in the 70s...the music, the clothes people wore, the lingo, the free love...I was born in the 70s so I never got to experience it, but have heard enough about it from parents, uncles and older friends to get an idea.

I also liked how Driver: Parallel Lines was done initially in the 70s...sure, the game itself was weak but I loved how they had all of the tuff muscle cars from back in the day, the music was ON HIT, the speedo looked exactly like the ones you'd find in old muscle cars (numbers run left the faster you go, instead of a dial), the physics weren't bad and the visuals were pretty nice, considering the game.

Maybe they can do LA in the 70s as that was another cultural center for that era. Maybe not ALL of SA, just Los Santos, and maybe offer San Fierro and LV as DLC but minus the boring ass countryside.

Coltrane's Muse
  • Coltrane's Muse

    From the Ashes, I Arise....

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 21 Apr 2008

#24

Posted 12 May 2008 - 05:05 PM

QUOTE (RONIN1191 @ May 12 2008, 17:03)
QUOTE (Coltrane's Muse @ May 12 2008, 11:28)
QUOTE (NuggetDog9 @ May 12 2008, 16:26)
QUOTE (RONIN1191 @ May 12 2008, 17:24)
All it says is the game was delayed due to the PS3 version not being ready at the previous launch...nowhere does it say it HAD to do the 360 version then port it to PS3.  Also, the contractual obligation TT had with Sony precluded 360 owners from getting the game when it WAS ready.  Still not reading that as 'it had to be done first because if it were done the other way, it would've failed'.

The delay occurred because the PS3 version of the game was not ready at the original launch date.  Nuff said.

Edited to add:  I HOPE and PRAY they return to 80s era Vice City ftw.

I agree with the VC bit.
It'd be awesome with the new Europhia etc.

To hell with the eighties; the nineteen seventies would be a far better era in which to set a spin-off title.

Yea, I would've liked to see a LC set in the 70s...the music, the clothes people wore, the lingo, the free love...I was born in the 70s so I never got to experience it, but have heard enough about it from parents, uncles and older friends to get an idea.

I also liked how Driver: Parallel Lines was done initially in the 70s...sure, the game itself was weak but I loved how they had all of the tuff muscle cars from back in the day, the music was ON HIT, the speedo looked exactly like the ones you'd find in old muscle cars (numbers run left the faster you go, instead of a dial), the physics weren't bad and the visuals were pretty nice, considering the game.

Maybe they can do LA in the 70s as that was another cultural center for that era. Maybe not ALL of SA, just Los Santos, and maybe offer San Fierro and LV as DLC but minus the boring ass countryside.

Los Santos would be a logical locale for a Grand Theft Auto title set in the seventies, but only if done correctly.

Interesting thoughts.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users