Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

San Fierro and Las Venteres DLC

22 replies to this topic
Fridope07
  • Fridope07

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2011

#1

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:01 AM

I think it would make perfect sense if the two other city's in San Andres were released as DLC. It would fit the GTA tradition of trilogy's, just like the two episodes from liberty city in IV. Also this would give rockstar plenty of time to give those citys the polish they deserve. They could appear on the map after downloading and you could fly there. or maybe they will get there own closed off maps and you will be able to take an airline from one region to another with a short load time (me might need to load because of the massive size of each territory).

annie_himself
  • annie_himself

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2011

#2

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:06 AM

No, too big. Impossible.

ccrogers15
  • ccrogers15

    REQUESTED BAN

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2010

#3

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:08 AM

QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:06)
No, too big. Impossible.

really. how is it impossible?

TargetTango
  • TargetTango

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2010

#4

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:11 AM

I hope to god not. "Please purchase Las Venturas DLC to access the island!"

annie_himself
  • annie_himself

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2011

#5

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:14 AM

QUOTE (ccrogers15 @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:08)
QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:06)
No, too big. Impossible.

really. how is it impossible?

Do you want to pay $60 for another city? Because it won't be cheap. It's possible but it's basically another game.

ccrogers15
  • ccrogers15

    REQUESTED BAN

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2010

#6

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:15 AM

QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:14)
QUOTE (ccrogers15 @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:08)
QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:06)
No, too big. Impossible.

really. how is it impossible?

Do you want to pay $60 for another city? Because it won't be cheap. It's possible but it's basically another game.

not really. Look at fallout 3 DLC. it adds locations like a hillbilly town, a space ship in space, pittburge, and others. And there little size and 9.99 each.

Iminicus
  • Iminicus

    You cried like a rape victim

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2004
  • Pitcairn-Islands

#7

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:16 AM

QUOTE (annie_himself @ Monday, Nov 14 2011, 22:14)
QUOTE (ccrogers15 @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:08)
QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:06)
No, too big. Impossible.

really. how is it impossible?

Do you want to pay $60 for another city? Because it won't be cheap. It's possible but it's basically another game.

I doubt it would be $60 for the assets, which is what you are downloading and then most will already be on the game disc.

loony979
  • loony979

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2010

#8

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:30 AM Edited by loony979, 15 November 2011 - 06:32 AM.

This DLC (Down Loadable Content) Fears has to stop. just will not happn Unless you ur a STEAM player,Were i prefer DVD's

Think about this for facts :GTA IV = 16gb
:GTA IV EFLC = 16GB
BOTH THE SAME.

This game GTA V will be twice this ,a guess 30 gb game ..If not a bit more.
Like look @ what we know Quote rahkstar2.gif The biggest game we made to date,Telling all of us that the map is bigger than RDR & due to the fact its a GTA game a sh*t storm more objects will be around Buildings & wot not .
GTA IV = 2 DVD's this may well be a 4 DVD game.(Well i hope so haha).
Keep that in mind.
Also hasnt this been asked b4 ? suicidal.gif suicidal.gif suicidal.gif

Tomern11
  • Tomern11

    RIP forums.gamer.co.il

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2008
  • Israel

#9

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:36 AM

Hopefully, not. confused.gif

Each and every city deserves attention and approach by a game of it's own.
Only thus can R* fulfill their true potential.

xUSMC SSGTx
  • xUSMC SSGTx

    United States Marine Treadhead

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2011

#10

Posted 15 November 2011 - 06:50 AM

A fully detailed city DLC would be to large. Its not going to happen.

annie_himself
  • annie_himself

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2011

#11

Posted 15 November 2011 - 07:51 AM

QUOTE (ccrogers15 @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:15)
QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:14)
QUOTE (ccrogers15 @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:08)
QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:06)
No, too big. Impossible.

really. how is it impossible?

Do you want to pay $60 for another city? Because it won't be cheap. It's possible but it's basically another game.

not really. Look at fallout 3 DLC. it adds locations like a hillbilly town, a space ship in space, pittburge, and others. And there little size and 9.99 each.

Don't have Fallout 3. Be realistic, an entire city won't be a DLC. The Vegas strip? It's possible, but it wouldn't be the whole detailed city.

Proud Fool
  • Proud Fool

    Mack Pimp

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010

#12

Posted 15 November 2011 - 08:16 AM

No they will make individual games for those cities.

Raptomex
  • Raptomex

    Listen to Slayer

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2004
  • United-States

#13

Posted 15 November 2011 - 08:16 AM

That would be ridiculous. And, yeah, it would be huge.

meson1
  • meson1

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2010

#14

Posted 15 November 2011 - 08:35 AM Edited by meson1, 15 November 2011 - 08:58 AM.

Unless GTA:V comes with SF and LV in the first place (which by the letter of their statement is not impossible, but I doubt will happen), we will not see any DLC with additional cities.

To be fair it's a nice idea to have three separate releases that all join up into one big game. It would split down the workload of creating the three different parts of the playing area. But the problems are:
  • It takes several years to fully create any one full sized playing area.
  • There are technical issues for consoles because each piece of the playing area would be on separate discs.
More likely is that we'll get all the playing area there is to get with the main release of the game. DLC Episodes will then be released to make additional use of that map. This gets the most return out of the investment in the creation of the map.

The other two cities will then be in Rockstar's back pocket, so that each of those in turn get the fullest and very best treatment in their very own games.

Fuzz_ball
  • Fuzz_ball

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2011

#15

Posted 15 November 2011 - 08:43 AM

Kinda like the idea about it. New story that might tie in with the main story, like how the EfLC and the reason why EfLC was 16 gb since it included both esp plus the cars and such from GTA: IV, but I remember correctly, separate they were about 4gb-ish. 20 dollars for a re-made city with a new story, to me, good deal. Might be a good thing for San Fierro since that city was the smallest in SA. :\

ccrogers15
  • ccrogers15

    REQUESTED BAN

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2010

#16

Posted 15 November 2011 - 08:46 AM

no i think they should save SF and LV for there own games. Los santos is in this one, and the next one can explore LV, then another one can explore SF.

Cyper
  • Cyper

    Liberty City Lover Since 2001

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2008
  • None

#17

Posted 15 November 2011 - 09:59 AM

No, it wont. Or at least I doubt it.

Even if it were, that would mean Rockstar would be away to greedy. Imo opinion DLCs should be exactly that - EXTRA CONTENT - not a completely new gaming experience. Big maps should already be included in the game not like in The Sims where you have to get all these f*cking retarded expansion packs.

Orestone
  • Orestone

    The down-low

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2011

#18

Posted 15 November 2011 - 11:44 AM

I was thinking about this too, and I hope this isnt the case.
In RDR they released alot of DLC content, I loved the game so I bought like 2 DLC's. But when I saw they we're releasing another one, I thought "damn, more? How much of my money do they want?"

So I hope Rockstar doesnt make another city as a DLC, or any other important content.
We're all happy to pay for GTA V, but I'll be kind of annoyed if they make another city as a DLC.

Eternal Moonshine
  • Eternal Moonshine

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2011
  • Poland

#19

Posted 15 November 2011 - 12:25 PM

I really, really hope not

prodigalsunz
  • prodigalsunz

    True wisdom is knowing that you know nothing

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2002

#20

Posted 15 November 2011 - 01:08 PM

They should stop with all this DLC nonsense and bring back the good old expansion packs.

Legendary912
  • Legendary912

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#21

Posted 15 November 2011 - 01:14 PM

They will obviously be in the game...

PulpFiction
  • PulpFiction

    The Libertonian grandmaster

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012

#22

Posted 15 November 2011 - 01:22 PM Edited by Miamivicecity, 15 November 2011 - 01:26 PM.

It would be such a waste. R* could do the cities better justice if they chose to decide to give them a make over as full fledged games.

They would most likely be a lot smaller and less detailed if given DLC treatment. EFLC represented great value for money, but this is asking too much for DLC.

Someone mentioned Fall Out 3 had new locations as DLC, but that game isn't GTA V.

I would imagine DLC of this caliber would be quite expensive to produce, so they might as well just give them their own games in the long run. More EFLC type DLC would be fine, but 2 new cities? No thanks.

TheTrooth
  • TheTrooth

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2011

#23

Posted 15 November 2011 - 04:00 PM

QUOTE (annie_himself @ Tuesday, Nov 15 2011, 06:06)
No, too big. Impossible.

Thread ended with this line as far as i'm concerned. Hit the nail on the coffin.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users