Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Would you like Las Venturas to Return?

77 replies to this topic

Poll: The Poll (144 member(s) have cast votes)

Las Venturas?

  1. Yes (112 votes [77.78%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 77.78%

  2. No (12 votes [8.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.33%

  3. Maybe/Unsure (20 votes [13.89%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.89%

Would you want the desert area around Las Venturas to return too?

  1. Yes (49 votes [34.03%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 34.03%

  2. Yes, with a huge Area 69. (75 votes [52.08%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 52.08%

  3. Yes, but no Las Venturas. (3 votes [2.08%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.08%

  4. No. (10 votes [6.94%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 6.94%

  5. Maybe/Unsure (7 votes [4.86%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 4.86%

Gambling?

  1. Of course! There is no Las Vegas/Las Venturas with no gambling! (106 votes [73.61%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 73.61%

  2. Yes. (22 votes [15.28%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.28%

  3. No. (4 votes [2.78%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 2.78%

  4. Maybe/Unsure (12 votes [8.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.33%

Vote Guests cannot vote
MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#61

Posted 23 July 2017 - 10:23 PM

 

I'd like to see the Northern San Andreas (LV and SF) after Vice City.

 

I want that before another game set in Vice City tbh, the latter is just too similiar to Los Santos. LV and SF together would provide a refreshing change after Los Santos.


 

Here's the problem LV is nowhere near SF in real life if you looked at a map. R* seems to be going for realism this time around and putting two cities that are nowhere near each other in real life sounds pretty unrealistic. While it's a nice idea I just don't see it happening.


I'd rather see a standalone SF with Oakland across the bridge and maybe include some more of Northern California by adding a version of Sacramento.

My thoughts exactly.

 

If I see SF paired with LV I'm gonna f*cking flip.

 

Personally I dont care in this case. Its not like they are that far apart in real life. I dont think either city can carry its own game so pairing them together makes sense.

 

SF and LV paired up wouldn't make sense.

Rockstar already said it was nearly impossible to pair LS with SF

That said SF's time has passed and doesn't need an excusive game.

Just finish the remaining locations (LV&VC) as the main focus and SF as a prologue.

Like users said, its unrealistic, a bygone  and will flip. 

Give us the locked islands with LV & VC again and not another dumbed down paired SF n LS w/ LV.


Journey_95
  • Journey_95

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2012
  • Germany

#62

Posted 23 July 2017 - 10:24 PM

 

 

I'd like to see the Northern San Andreas (LV and SF) after Vice City.

 

I want that before another game set in Vice City tbh, the latter is just too similiar to Los Santos. LV and SF together would provide a refreshing change after Los Santos.


 

Here's the problem LV is nowhere near SF in real life if you looked at a map. R* seems to be going for realism this time around and putting two cities that are nowhere near each other in real life sounds pretty unrealistic. While it's a nice idea I just don't see it happening.


I'd rather see a standalone SF with Oakland across the bridge and maybe include some more of Northern California by adding a version of Sacramento.

My thoughts exactly.

 

If I see SF paired with LV I'm gonna f*cking flip.

 

Personally I dont care in this case. Its not like they are that far apart in real life. I dont think either city can carry its own game so pairing them together makes sense.

 

SF and LV paired up wouldn't make sense.

Rockstar already said it was nearly impossible to pair LS with SF

That said SF's time has passed and doesn't need an excusive game.

Just finish the remaining locations (LV&VC) as the main focus and SF as a prologue.

Like users said, its unrealistic, a bygone  and will flip. 

Give us the locked islands with LV & VC again and not another dumbed down paired SF n LS w/ LV.

 

And how would LV and VC together fit? I mean I prefer those cities to SF as well but pairing them seems way sillier than SF and LV.

  • Zello likes this

MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#63

Posted 23 July 2017 - 10:30 PM Edited by MojoGamer, 23 July 2017 - 10:40 PM.

 

 

 

I'd like to see the Northern San Andreas (LV and SF) after Vice City.

 

I want that before another game set in Vice City tbh, the latter is just too similiar to Los Santos. LV and SF together would provide a refreshing change after Los Santos.


 

Here's the problem LV is nowhere near SF in real life if you looked at a map. R* seems to be going for realism this time around and putting two cities that are nowhere near each other in real life sounds pretty unrealistic. While it's a nice idea I just don't see it happening.


I'd rather see a standalone SF with Oakland across the bridge and maybe include some more of Northern California by adding a version of Sacramento.

My thoughts exactly.

 

If I see SF paired with LV I'm gonna f*cking flip.

 

Personally I dont care in this case. Its not like they are that far apart in real life. I dont think either city can carry its own game so pairing them together makes sense.

 

SF and LV paired up wouldn't make sense.

Rockstar already said it was nearly impossible to pair LS with SF

That said SF's time has passed and doesn't need an excusive game.

Just finish the remaining locations (LV&VC) as the main focus and SF as a prologue.

Like users said, its unrealistic, a bygone  and will flip. 

Give us the locked islands with LV & VC again and not another dumbed down paired SF n LS w/ LV.

 

And how would LV and VC together fit? I mean I prefer those cities to SF as well but pairing them seems way sillier than SF and LV.

 

I didn't say "fit" or "pair", I said locate them together with the returning feature of "locked islands". Where 5 star police will hunt you down relentlessly, that way it will be more realistic and make sense too.

They will connect with Interstate 15 (LV) and Interstate 95 (Miami)


Maybach62
  • Maybach62

    this part time souldiers got our shoulders wet fool

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Jul 2017
  • Honduras

#64

Posted 25 July 2017 - 01:57 AM

how about based in the 90s in HD


MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#65

Posted 25 July 2017 - 02:40 AM

how about based in the 90s in HD

It'll be better modern, cause of the developer's direction to finish up the HD era.

It would be cool to revisit the 90's, but it was already done in the 3D era.

If they do go back in time like the 1970s, Cuba would be a awesome settling for my CoD Black Ops nostalgia.

They could also do Max Payne 4 or GTA 7 in a post apocalypse settling in London or France.

The 90s again for the GTA Series, I will not tolerate.


Queen Elizabeth II
  • Queen Elizabeth II

    ______________________

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2014
  • Poland

#66

Posted 03 August 2017 - 03:22 PM

You won't tolerate 90s in GTA Series but you would tolerate a post apocalypse London/France!? What!

  • GTA-Biker, Mortsnarg and TheFranchise like this

Mortsnarg
  • Mortsnarg

    Irony and bad ideas

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 May 2015
  • United-States

#67

Posted 04 August 2017 - 10:46 PM

You won't tolerate 90s in GTA Series but you would tolerate a post apocalypse London/France!? What!

Of course the Queen would be against post apocalyptic London smh


anthony
  • anthony

    Nobody cares, nobody f*cking cares.

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2011
  • None

#68

Posted 05 August 2017 - 06:41 AM

f*ck yeah !


Dan_1983
  • Dan_1983

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2002

#69

Posted 06 August 2017 - 12:08 AM

Wouldn't mind it. I'd rather see a city in the next GTA that hasn't been done before though.


fashion
  • fashion

    Glory to Mankind!

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2014
  • Palestine

#70

Posted 07 August 2017 - 08:02 AM Edited by fashion, 07 August 2017 - 08:02 AM.

While I love the idea and would completely accept it if GTA6 was set in LV, I think I would rather see a darker city. Last time we had the shiny Los Santos.

I doubt R* could beat Watch Dogs 2's San Francisco either. A part of me hopes for a brand new location.
  • Yinepi likes this

N R G
  • N R G

    Press Command-Shift-W for a surprise

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 May 2014
  • Isle-of-Man

#71

Posted 09 August 2017 - 03:56 AM

no, no, no. i hated las venturas

JustRob
  • JustRob

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2008

#72

Posted 09 August 2017 - 01:53 PM

While I love the idea and would completely accept it if GTA6 was set in LV, I think I would rather see a darker city. Last time we had the shiny Los Santos.

I doubt R* could beat Watch Dogs 2's San Francisco either. A part of me hopes for a brand new location.

 

You think Rockstar can't do better than f*cking Ubisoft? lol

 

If Rockstar did San Fierro in HD it would BLOW Watch Dogs 2 out of the water


MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#73

Posted 09 August 2017 - 05:12 PM

But it didn't blow Los Santos, so San Fierro is not likely due to Leslie Benzie's failed story dlcs.


The Paradox
  • The Paradox

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 4 weeks ago
  • Turkey

#74

Posted 2 weeks ago

F**k Lv, it is the worst gta city ever. I really hate it and don't want it to return.


Shyabang Shyabang
  • Shyabang Shyabang

    Wild Thing

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2011

#75

Posted A week ago

An annual event like this one near Las Venturas:

 


Gokuzbu
  • Gokuzbu

    Luis and Niko will not be touched by Trevor.

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Jun 2012
  • United-Kingdom

#76

Posted 6 days ago

Las Venturas would be great why not. Maybe have San Fierro at the same time if you can.


Yinepi
  • Yinepi

    Wepwawet Wannabe

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2016
  • Egypt

#77

Posted 6 days ago Edited by Yinepi, 6 days ago.

Yes. Hell, anything with a large and real-looking desert is a welcome change of pace after GTAIV's grey urban sprawl, and GTAV's confused identity.

absolutely

 

providing rockstar uses a new engine (not like the one used for gta v) then the game would be perfect if set in las venturas. they could focus all their resources on making the actual city detailed with lots of interiors. make every hotel and casino enterable.

 

this is a map i did for my thread a while back

kcnk49.png

 

but just imagine, a huge las venturas with a massive desert that has small towns and crazy roadside attractions that you can interact with. 

Personally, I'd seperate it have two counties, I'd put the mountain Mesa range on the bottom. Make the bay smaller, move LV, Area 69, Slag City,  and Crag Town to the bottom, and put Fort Carson, Nippleton, and Ghost Town on the upper left and remove the two cities on the river area to simulate real Nevada state layout.

 

Bone County is based off Clark County and would then cover the areas of the bay, Las Venturas, Slag City, Sloan, Area 69, and Crag town, and another county based off Washoe County covering Nippleton, Fort Carson, and Ghost Town. If I may take a guess on the cities:

 

Area 69 - Area 51, NV

Fort Carson - Carson City, NV

Slag City - Henderson, NV

Crag Town - Boulder City, NV

Sloan - Panaca, NV

Nippleton - Reno, NV

Ghost Town - Gerlach, NV


ViceOfLiberty
  • ViceOfLiberty

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2017
  • United-States

#78

Posted 2 days ago

I'd Nerf the bay and make a rendition of Reno/Tahoe




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users