Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Who Provides Claude the Apartment

15 replies to this topic

Poll: Who Provides Claude the Apartment in Shoreside Vale? (36 member(s) have cast votes)

Who Provides Claude the Apartment in Shoreside Vale?

  1. Donald Love (8 votes [26.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.67%

  2. D-Ice (2 votes [6.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.67%

  3. Somebody Else (4 votes [13.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.33%

  4. None (16 votes [53.33%])

    Percentage of vote: 53.33%

Vote Guests cannot vote
Forsas Saltis
  • Forsas Saltis

    Povke (my earlier nickname)

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2010
  • Lithuania

#1

Posted 22 August 2013 - 08:44 AM

Let's decide who provides Claude the apartment in Shoreside Vale!

My choice is 'D-Ice', because his own missions are located in Wichita Gardens and it's Hoods' turf, too. So why'd somebody else provide Claude the apartment in Hoods' turf?
  • badass nyuka is bak likes this

Tycek
  • Tycek

    Being a bastard works.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2009
  • Poland

#2

Posted 22 August 2013 - 09:06 AM

Developers who thought it will be nice to give another safehouse to player to lower the frustration and increase the balance of the game.

Arsen Vitiuk
  • Arsen Vitiuk

    Grand Theft Auto III Chain Game Former Chief

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2010
  • Ukraine

#3

Posted 22 August 2013 - 10:26 AM

I guess this is just one of those questions that don't need an answer. This question is strongly subjective, as there is no in-game explanation as to how Claude got his hands on the safehouse.

I'd say None - and I could only speculate that the developers didn't really bother themselves with an explanation. Because, as a matter of fact, does it need any?

P.S. It's the same as this topic here. There will NEVER be an objective answer here.

GtaIvFanboy
  • GtaIvFanboy

    I Have a Foot Fetish

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2013

#4

Posted 22 August 2013 - 04:33 PM Edited by GtaIvFanboy, 22 August 2013 - 04:39 PM.

aint that like a projects? claude rented a room. wink.gif

Xegethra
  • Xegethra

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2007

#5

Posted 22 August 2013 - 04:58 PM Edited by Xegethra, 22 August 2013 - 09:24 PM.

QUOTE (Arsen Vitiuk @ Thursday, Aug 22 2013, 10:26)
I guess this is just one of those questions that don't need an answer. This question is strongly subjective, as there is no in-game explanation as to how Claude got his hands on the safehouse.

I'd say None - and I could only speculate that the developers didn't really bother themselves with an explanation. Because, as a matter of fact, does it need any?

P.S. It's the same as this topic here. There will NEVER be an objective answer here.

There is no answer yes, but that shouldn't stop people thinking about it and deciding who owns it...it's one of those things Rockstar left blank again and wouldn't mind anyone making their own answers....otherwise they would have had someone give it to us. It is the fact that it is subjective, that is the reason people come up their own ideas, that's what subjective means and allows...if there was an objective reason from Rockstar, and people knew it, they wouldn't come up with these ideas and questions so much. The subjective nature, gives people more freedom to think about the game world in these ways. It would make the concept of subjectiveness rather redundant if people didn't think about these ideas. If a door is open to interpretation, people are gonna walk through it in their own way. It's good that people can flex their creative ideas if they want, especially if there is no right or wrong answer. There is no in-game answer you are correct, but that's the exact reason why these topics exist.

Nobody is looking for an objective answer, as clearly this topic is asking for others people's ideas, not hard evidence when there isn't any. As for whether it needs answer? Evidently it does to some people or they wouldn't come up with their own ideas to fill in the gap.

It's one of those things that if you don't make up an answer to...it's just a gaping hole that makes the world feel less believable. Sorry for the little essay...but still, it is a game with gaps in it, no denying that so is it any wonder people want to fill them in?

But anyway like GtaIvFanboy says, the building doesn't have to be given to him by anyone like the other two places, he could just be renting a room there....or squatting...whichever.

MyDog
  • MyDog

    Niko Bellic's my burazer

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2009
  • Serbia

#6

Posted 23 August 2013 - 03:42 PM

Maybe he got it himself.

lol232
  • lol232

    Even though you're fed up, you gotta keep your head up'.

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2010
  • Serbia

#7

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:06 PM

QUOTE (MyDog @ Friday, Aug 23 2013, 17:42)
Maybe he got it himself.

This.
Maybe he just had it before.

Arsen Vitiuk
  • Arsen Vitiuk

    Grand Theft Auto III Chain Game Former Chief

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2010
  • Ukraine

#8

Posted 24 August 2013 - 06:30 PM

QUOTE (Xegethra @ Thursday, Aug 22 2013, 19:58)
It's one of those things that if you don't make up an answer to...it's just a gaping hole that makes the world feel less believable. Sorry for the little essay...but still, it is a game with gaps in it, no denying that so is it any wonder people want to fill them in?

Not trying to be hostile or disapproving, but eventually it was people thinking like you who created religion.

Science was on a low level then, it could not explain many things - even now it is not at that progressive level to tell us the whole story behind the universe's existence. Religion was convenient and convincing - it provided many false theories that would settle the seeking human mind. Things that could not be explained would be viewed as deeds of various deities - "gods" - ranging from a group of gods, where each of them controls a part of the nature, to one god, who holds the monopoly over the powers of the nature. And so we got all the religions in the world.

While all of these religions are plausible enough to believe them, it is evident that all of them are false at the same time, as they have a different point of view on the same matter. Many things are surely explained in a much more simple way - we just have to wait until scientists do this (there are people busy with trying to fill the blank gaps even now as I write).
Or we could put our minds to it - surely, some things are much better explainable if you see the connections. Possessing the knowledge about "tiny details" will lead us nowhere if we cannot connect these pieces into a full working system.

So, what I was leading to was, "filling the gaps" (as you say) is like a religion. Everyone has his own explanation for a matter that has no answer (as of now, at least). While everyone is right in his own way, everyone is wrong at the same time. It's just a subjective opinion. The only objective explanation we can offer is "Rockstar decided to do it that way". Yes, we could possibly ask Rockstar about explanation - and it would be the one and only correct explanation, since it was them who created the game. But I doubt that anybody in the developers team bothered themselves with this question. In the end we will, most surely, never know.

Even so, while it is not explainable, as well as many other things, it definitely has those fragile invisible connections to other details in the game that make it fit so perfectly until you start to ask questions starting with "How" or "Why". It's the general rule: as long as you accept everything as it is, it's plausible. Start asking questions - and you will get unsettled and will not be able to look at the things same as before.

So is it really necessary to explain everything that has no explanation. Sometimes - yes. But on other occasions, it will be a thing that nobody really needs to do.

In any case, nobody stops you from wondering. I was just voicing (or, more exactly, writing) my point of view on this matter and on the life in whole. I also turn out to write essays about matters that matter to me.



On-topic: If I am to accept MyDog and lol232's theory, then I have to add that Claude had gotten that safe house not so long before the Bank Heist (which we witnessed during the opening cutscene). This will fit the explanation that Claude is new in the city.
As El Burro saide during "Turismo", "You are new in Liberty, but already you are gaining reputations on the streets"

Kristian.
  • Kristian.

    Supralux (ΛΟ)

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#9

Posted 24 August 2013 - 06:42 PM

^ I like that theory as well. I'm not sure what you mean by that El Burro line. We don't know where he is supposed to live and how he knows things about Claude. Which mission unlocks his missions?

universetwisters
  • universetwisters

    Ich liebe dich, so wie du bist.

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Feb 2011
  • United-States
  • Best Workshop 2014
    Most Improved 2014
    Funniest Member 2014
    April Fools Winner 2015

#10

Posted 24 August 2013 - 10:33 PM

I keep thinking that Claude sleeps in the lobby underneath a flattened sheet of cardboard. Like a homeless dude or something.

lol232
  • lol232

    Even though you're fed up, you gotta keep your head up'.

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2010
  • Serbia

#11

Posted 24 August 2013 - 10:51 PM

QUOTE (universetwisters @ Sunday, Aug 25 2013, 00:33)
I keep thinking that Claude sleeps in the lobby underneath a flattened sheet of cardboard. Like a homeless dude or something.

There's and elevator over there for a reason... He takes it, goes to his apartment, does his sh*t and he's back in 6 hours.

Szymonescu
  • Szymonescu

    livin' in the 80's

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2009

#12

Posted 24 August 2013 - 11:03 PM

He plays the Chain Game in his basement.

Mr.ClaudeFan
  • Mr.ClaudeFan

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2012

#13

Posted 24 August 2013 - 11:08 PM

I think I saw this in another thread, but maybe Claude and Catalina got it when they arrived in Liberty City and before the huge bank robbery? If that's correct then I'm thinking Claude suddenly remembered that he had a house in Shoreside all this time.
  • Jeansowaty likes this

Xegethra
  • Xegethra

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2007

#14

Posted 25 August 2013 - 03:26 AM Edited by Xegethra, 25 August 2013 - 03:45 AM.

QUOTE (Arsen Vitiuk @ Saturday, Aug 24 2013, 18:30)
QUOTE (Xegethra @ Thursday, Aug 22 2013, 19:58)
It's one of those things that if you don't make up an answer to...it's just a gaping hole that makes the world feel less believable. Sorry for the little essay...but still, it is a game with gaps in it, no denying that so is it any wonder people want to fill them in?

Not trying to be hostile or disapproving, but eventually it was people thinking like you who created religion.

Science was on a low level then, it could not explain many things - even now it is not at that progressive level to tell us the whole story behind the universe's existence. Religion was convenient and convincing - it provided many false theories that would settle the seeking human mind. Things that could not be explained would be viewed as deeds of various deities - "gods" - ranging from a group of gods, where each of them controls a part of the nature, to one god, who holds the monopoly over the powers of the nature. And so we got all the religions in the world.

While all of these religions are plausible enough to believe them, it is evident that all of them are false at the same time, as they have a different point of view on the same matter. Many things are surely explained in a much more simple way - we just have to wait until scientists do this (there are people busy with trying to fill the blank gaps even now as I write).
Or we could put our minds to it - surely, some things are much better explainable if you see the connections. Possessing the knowledge about "tiny details" will lead us nowhere if we cannot connect these pieces into a full working system.

So, what I was leading to was, "filling the gaps" (as you say) is like a religion. Everyone has his own explanation for a matter that has no answer (as of now, at least). While everyone is right in his own way, everyone is wrong at the same time. It's just a subjective opinion. The only objective explanation we can offer is "Rockstar decided to do it that way". Yes, we could possibly ask Rockstar about explanation - and it would be the one and only correct explanation, since it was them who created the game. But I doubt that anybody in the developers team bothered themselves with this question. In the end we will, most surely, never know.

Even so, while it is not explainable, as well as many other things, it definitely has those fragile invisible connections to other details in the game that make it fit so perfectly until you start to ask questions starting with "How" or "Why". It's the general rule: as long as you accept everything as it is, it's plausible. Start asking questions - and you will get unsettled and will not be able to look at the things same as before.

So is it really necessary to explain everything that has no explanation. Sometimes - yes. But on other occasions, it will be a thing that nobody really needs to do.

In any case, nobody stops you from wondering. I was just voicing (or, more exactly, writing) my point of view on this matter and on the life in whole. I also turn out to write essays about matters that matter to me.



On-topic: If I am to accept MyDog and lol232's theory, then I have to add that Claude had gotten that safe house not so long before the Bank Heist (which we witnessed during the opening cutscene). This will fit the explanation that Claude is new in the city.
As El Burro saide during "Turismo", "You are new in Liberty, but already you are gaining reputations on the streets"

Well, yeah it does make religion....religion is just a creative story taken too far.

But without that nature to create and wonder...we wouldn't have any creative stories at all, no GTA for one. I don't agree with religion either. Science also asks a few questions, proving things, disproving things..asking a questions, getting an answer and then asking even more questions. Science is full of mazes like that. You have said asking questions about things breeds more, and you seem to not be on religions side.....yet science is just as clueless on a load of things because of gaining more questions than answers. But at least science can still be right a lot of the time...it's why we have technology, medical help and stuff. And I yeah, it is science refusing to make up things so much that leaves these gaps and it won't fill them until it has a proper answer gained by proof and investigation.

Sure, a person who guesses and fills in the gaps can lead to false conclusions....and in the real world, that is a bad idea I will agree...but in a video game, where the devs couldn't/didn't want to flesh out any details on something....it makes the game feel full of holes and not totally intact.

In the real world, it is best to look and see and get proof to fill in the gaps. Better to learn and whatnot. And that takes up thinking about the small things, just as much as thinking about the big things....there would be no big thing, without the little ones making it up. To understand all the little things, to learn about each of them individually...helps to understand the big thing they contribute too. And a little thing may even be useful on it's own or being made part of another bigger thing, so studying it is still needed. Little things are also important because if a bigger thing is broken or not working....and it's due to one tiny thing, it is finding that tiny thing and dealing with it that may fix the problem. It's not, and never was just about the big picture alone.

In games and stories with plot holes, the story can be somewhat hampered by these holes and if there is no official explanation for them, people will fill them in. It takes a creative person to do that...and without these creative people, we wouldn't have stories at all to read.

As for the general rule "It's the general rule: as long as you accept everything as it is, it's plausible. Start asking questions - and you will get unsettled and will not be able to look at the things same as before." That is also religions way of thinking....they see a notion of god, and never question it....it's not asking questions, that will never lead to any sort of truth. The less people accept things the way they are, the more they seek real answers, whether they get them or not is something else, but at least they try.

I don't think we'll ever see quite eye to eye on this, however I do agree with you that making up false conclusions for real life, bad idea. But for a story that lends itself for that? It's a chance to make the story feel a bit more whole.

Arsen Vitiuk
  • Arsen Vitiuk

    Grand Theft Auto III Chain Game Former Chief

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2010
  • Ukraine

#15

Posted 25 August 2013 - 08:05 AM

QUOTE (_____ @ Saturday, Aug 24 2013, 21:42)
^ I like that theory as well. I'm not sure what you mean by that El Burro line. We don't know where he is supposed to live and how he knows things about Claude. Which mission unlocks his missions?

El Burro's missions are unlocked after Joey's "Van Heist" mission. If we are to take the shortest route, that would make roughly 6 Storyline missions (with "Give Me Liberty" and "Luigi's Game" counted as one).

@ Xegethra: Now that you've made your final point, I understood where all these debates stemmed from.
I just tend to tread games like a real world, a reality, rather than just a game. When I treat a game like another real life, it helps me associate more with it, I feel myself a part of this game. As if I am not the player, but rather someone from the "inside" of the game. And I am trying to implement all the laws of the nature into the game.

It all works fine until I find these gaps and loopholes where I cannot apply science and chase the right answer to no avail - simply because any game is a creation of a human mind. And let us agree, for any human being, it is almost impossible to consider all tiny details when creating anything - let it be a game, a film, a book or anything else. There will almost always be loopholes. It takes a real genius to create something that works well with everything in its place and nothing left unexplained.

About tiny details. Yes, I agree, knowing what is what is important. But there is just more than that. When something goes wrong, the question should be not what detail went wrong, but what exactly about that detail went wrong. And if you know the connections, you can see how one mishap can affect all the other elements in the system, directly or indirectly, even possibly leading to the system's demise. It's the same with any disease.

But let's return to the game. When understanding that applying science and logic on these loopholes is simply impossible - because there would be no objective answer rather than the fact that it was simply decided to be done so by the development team, I simply decide to ignore these loopholes rather than creating a "religion" that would explain them. I'm trying not to think about something I can't find an answer to. Because in the end I understand that the game - any game - is not truly a real world. It was a creation of a human mind. And any human mind is imperfect.

Rather than leaving a gaping hole, I try to cover up these loopholes by analysing how well they are connected to the other things in game. That is when seeing the connections helps at least partially cover up something that has not been considered by a human mind. Because no matter how many explanations I can provide to answer my question, it will always be a "religion" - and knowingly false theories do not please my mind.

This is just how I work in real life: if I am unsure about a validity of any theory, I am trying to find proof to it. If I see none, then I assume the theory is false. However, sometimes these assumptions can be looked over, in the light of discovering new facts, new details and new connections. If they are still proved false, then I will be looking for a theory that fits well.

Sometimes, even a well-known theory, accepted by all, appears to be false. Because, while it could be a perfect explanation to almost everything, it leaves one tiny little loophole, which nobody pays attention to. And again, while one could say that this means nothing, knowing how that "loophole" connects to the other elements in the system which the theory is explaining can lead you to realisation that the whole theory is wrong.
Had once received a B instead of A for biochemistry only because I questioned one such a theory - and yes, I did prove it was false. And came up with a much more plausible explanation. In the end, I was deemed to be a sort of heretic.

So, to make long story short, my general rule: "Never assume something is right until you get proof that the theory is working and no more loopholes are left". And that is why I opt to leave the question unanswered until I get a more or less working theory than coming up with an explanation that is plausible only to my mind. I'd be fooling myself - and I hat to do this.

Xegethra
  • Xegethra

    Trick

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2007

#16

Posted 25 August 2013 - 11:16 AM

Aye that makes sense.

Like you say, no story is perfect and has it's loopholes and contradictions. But at least in the case of GTA, they are generally enjoyable games (Save for GTA 4, never got into it so much, except Lost and Damned my favourite GTA 4 game)




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users