Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Are You Tired of Re-Used Cities?

135 replies to this topic
Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Pink.Inc

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2004
  • None
  • Best Poster [Music] 2016
    Best Poster [Music] 2015
    Best Poster [Music] 2014
    Most Knowledgeable [Music] 2013
    Best Contributor [Music] 2012

#1

Posted 24 February 2017 - 02:41 PM Edited by Mister Pink, 06 May 2017 - 05:27 AM.

We haven't had a new GTA city since San Andreas. Although Los Santos was in 2D Los Santos, San Fierro and Las Venturas were new GTA-styled cities to explore. That was nearly 13 years ago. 

 

Rockstar brought us to Los Santos/LA many times in games such as Midnight Club II, Midnight Club L.A, GTA: San Andreas, L.A. Noire, GTA V. Exploring those cities isn't really as exciting as it was 13 years ago when open-world games, particularly GTA-style games were fresh. 

 

Do you miss exploring a city new for the first time? Part of why I loved playing III, Vice City and San Andreas was (in hindsight) that all those cities were new to me to explore like that, in an open-world game. In the last 10 years we've just been getting improved versions of those cities, great improvements but not really new experiences as they were first playing VC or SA. 

 

I think it would be nice Rockstar forgot about gimmicks like multiple characters and considered a return to form in terms of possibly going back in time and a new setting but most importantly a new setting. A city that isn't covered by another open-world developer like Boston (can't consider Fallout 4 a competitor as it's way to in the future and genre/style is way too different). I wont go in to that right now as I've expressed it in other topics.

 

Would be great to have that new GTA feel in a new city. A city where you aren't looking for artifacts of a previous GTA. A new city where everything is new. A new city you may not have known much about before but now you find yourself wanting to visit there because you played it in GTA. A new city where you are actively searching out films that are set there. 

 

TLDR: (you should read more :p)

 

Are you tired of returning to re-used cities, the same cities you've been watching in other games and films over and over? Would you prefer something a little outside the box that is New York, Miami and Los Angeles. Don't get me wrong, I love those cities but maybe a longer break was needed before we went back to Liberty or Los Santos (not taking away from how good those cities were portrayed).

  • -Anti-, B Dawg, vnus_dmlo and 10 others like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#2

Posted 24 February 2017 - 04:27 PM

I'm certainly fed up. Had they re-used Liberty city and Los Santos for something wonderful and different in terms of gameplay and content, then I would not have been this disappointed. But the matter of fact is that there has been simply a lot of rehashing, from story, missions, characters and even certain dialogues match with the 3D era characters, like Jimmy/Ray and Catalina both can be seen saying, " Were you followed?", Tommy and Niko, "I work for money", and many more lines from GTA IV and V have striking similarities with the 3D era dialogues.
I'd have been more happy if Rockstar simply gave us remaster versions of GTA III, Vice city and San Andreas in RAGE, instead of repeating the same cities and made it boring by removing a lot of things and replaced it with nothing interesting, while refining some of the features but still stuck in the past when it comes to police AI, and other glitches that still exist, but should have been improved by now.
If I take away the graphics and physics then I have already experienced these cities years ago.
So, I certainly don't want this to continue with GTA VI and want a completely different treatment to whatever city and setting they approach. It should remind me less about the old games, and offer more surprises and satisfaction, just like Watch Dogs 2 has easily won me over.
  • Maibatsu545, LaBombaRomba, SmokesWithCigs and 1 other like this

LevelDockSix
  • LevelDockSix

    Sure Shot

  • Paleto Bay Mayor's Office
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2012
  • India

#3

Posted 24 February 2017 - 05:43 PM

I mean, exploring the new renditions of the original cities were nice when IV (especially) and V came out (VC still remains obviously), but yes, I'd love for R* to visit a location completely new to the series.

 

My guess is the next title might bring a new one (or perhaps switch to Carcer City even :whistle:) while still allowing us to visit the existing HD era cities because they still haven't done anything like that properly (I say that since SA had a small instance of northern Portland in it). Maybe that will be the new gimmick instead of multiple protagonists.

  • Mister Pink and mgarc1125 like this

Maibatsu545
  • Maibatsu545

    veritas vos liberabit

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2014
  • United-States

#4

Posted 24 February 2017 - 06:37 PM Edited by Maibatsu545, 24 February 2017 - 06:39 PM.

I'm with Osho on this one. That's what I mean when I say the HD era was a waste of time. They're essentially prettier HD versions of 3D era cities. V was especially a waste of time because San Andreas was actually smaller than before, with LESS activities to do as well. NY and LA, SF and LV could be done MUCH more interestingly than how they were done in the HD era. We need more activities and more ways to interact with the cities instead of having them be pretty albeit completely dead and boring places to be.
  • Mister Pink, vnus_dmlo, CartmanKusanagi and 2 others like this

evd
  • evd

    acid

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2014
  • None

#5

Posted 24 February 2017 - 08:00 PM Edited by evd, 24 February 2017 - 08:03 PM.

well, I would like to point that the reason to have another city, is to use to tell a story. Los Angeles is a landmark for popculture, countless films were shot there, NY the same. 

 

But that would be it. US does not have that many more cool things to offer. Lets not beat it to death with some minor cities that nobody outside US really cares.

 

Carcer City consisted of Chicago and Detroit, that would work, but ehmm Seattle? that would please mostly Americans.

  • Official General likes this

SonicTheSexhog
  • SonicTheSexhog

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Dec 2015
  • None

#6

Posted 24 February 2017 - 08:17 PM Edited by SonicTheSexhog, 24 February 2017 - 08:18 PM.

They should make a GTA outside the US imo. I guess they probably don't because they aren't used to their culture so much and they wouldn't have enough ideas to make parodies and jokes. A GTA in any place of Europe would be great for me.

I imagine they will make HD San Francisco, Miami and Las Vegas first though.

  • Mister Pink, SausageTaste and Yinepi like this

Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#7

Posted 24 February 2017 - 09:01 PM Edited by Official General, 25 February 2017 - 01:54 AM.

well, I would like to point that the reason to have another city, is to use to tell a story. Los Angeles is a landmark for popculture, countless films were shot there, NY the same. 
 
But that would be it. US does not have that many more cool things to offer. Lets not beat it to death with some minor cities that nobody outside US really cares.
 
Carcer City consisted of Chicago and Detroit, that would work, but ehmm Seattle? that would please mostly Americans.

I'm gonna have to agree with you and go with this. This exactly sums up my thoughts on the subject too.

Yes indeed it would be very interesting, and I dare exciting to see another American city like Boston, Philadelphia etc, to be depicted in GTA, especially for GTA purists like us who'd surely appreciate it a lot. But as much as I'd like to agree with the OP, Mr. Pink and Osho (you made fair points, even though), it's just not a concept that can likely be implemented in GTA successfully enough to please the wider GTA fan base. Other American cities than the ones mentioned just don't have the right mix of vital ingredients needed for an ideal GTA setting. That special kind of cinematic appeal, iconic status, and legendary reputation a city needs for an ideal GTA location is possessed by very few US cities, namely New York, Los Angeles, Miami and Chicago, and to a lesser extent Las Vegas and San Francisco (in conjunction with LA). Anything outside of these places, no one else will really care about, and the game wouldn't be successful or popular with the fans.

I was very happy that Rockstar revisited LC with IV, and they had a perfectly good reason and legitimate excuse. LC in III was NYC-influenced to a degree, but it was clear to see that through map design that it was not really supposed to be a close re-creation of NYC, LC still presented itself as a generic large American East Coast city, and it may even have had Midwest city influences too. Whatever it was, III's LC certainly was not a close re-creation of NYC and Rockstar always stated it was their dream and desire to make their own detailed, full NYC re-creation with LC in IV, which they did brilliantly.

As for V, I didn't mind the return to LS either, but Rockstar's awful map design, wastefulness of map space, lack of decent side missions and things to do, and poor story writing/characters made me wish they had never bothered doing it at all. The fact that they didn't include SF and LV in V reinforced that feeling.

I'm definitely all for another revisit to VC as you and others already know, but set in modern-day, in HD and in much more detail. This has not been done before, hence it's another very valid reason for Rockstar to revisit Miami.

The only other city not visited by Rockstar I really want to see is Chicago, which has all the vital ingredients for an ideal GTA location in pretty much every way. Chicago, that would be great. As for a non-American city, that's just a big NO from me, I won't even discuss why.

  • Mister Pink, Journey_95, Maibatsu545 and 1 other like this

Femme Fatale
  • Femme Fatale

    Boy You Make Me Make Bad Decisions

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2014
  • Mexico

#8

Posted 24 February 2017 - 09:10 PM

Yeah, they should consider parodying a different city. But I still wanna see VC in HD, I'm sure it would look beautiful.
  • Official General, AnDReJ98, Roger Cheeto and 2 others like this

Jabalous
  • Jabalous

    Villager

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • None

#9

Posted 24 February 2017 - 09:29 PM

What about the idea of building a city that's inspired by several real life US cities located in one large area? Rather than building an entire setting based on New York (Liberty City), make one that is based on New York, Chicago, Boston and maybe Washington DC. This approach might be not popular and I can see that particular setting losing its charm since it wouldn't be associated with one exact city/area, but who knows. Think of Mafia's Lost Heaven and Empire Bay, both of which don't resemble one real city only. 


GTA-Biker
  • GTA-Biker

    Let's Rock

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2014
  • Croatia

#10

Posted 24 February 2017 - 09:43 PM

I don't mind having the next GTA game set in Vice City, Las Venturas or San Fierro again,but I think some city in the Midwest (something like Chicago or Detroit) would be a good setting.

  • gta111 and Official General like this

TheOneLibertonian
  • TheOneLibertonian

    The Butcher of Blaviken

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2013
  • Philippines

#11

Posted 24 February 2017 - 09:47 PM Edited by TheOneLibertonian, 24 February 2017 - 09:55 PM.

A big, giant portion of GTA is the referential awareness to pop culture. I think that a city in a GTA game should be relevant, and popular to the masses. Cities like New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago, Las Vegas, and San Francisco are cities with known status. GTA is known for being homage to different forms of cinema, and various forms of television. These cities have that status of cinematic triumph that other US based cities do not have. I do support the idea that new cities can pave to new surroundings, new environments, and new form of different cultures, but GTA has always strived to be inspired from other form of media, like films. 

 

Story, and narrative is a big important part of the GTA experience. The story should compliment, and provide for what location it is set in. Also inspiration from different types of organized crime is often included for whatever fits the story. Every major GTA title since III has that feeling. III basically was the introduction, and provided homage to various different form of crime. VC was obviously a homage to movies like Scarface, and the source material it was based from. The boom of drug trafficking in 80's Miami. San Andreas has the impact of early 90's Los Angeles, and the various organized gangs within the city, particularly South LA, and the infamous 1992 LA Riots. Also included are the homage to various cop/chase movies set in San Fran, and the Ocean's Eleven/Heist feel of Las Vegas. IV on the other hand has a slight different direction. It really was not a obvious homage to movies, and organized crime, but it is a more sinister, gritty tale of an immigrant seeking for the so called "American Dream". It still payed homage to films, and modern organized crime. V however had the focus of Heists within it's story. Obviously based on movies like Heat. It not only paid homage to the movie itself, but inspired one of the missions within the game called Blitz Play. V had a bigger focus on modern tropes like Social Media, Celebrities, and satire of modern American values, and family. 

 

GTA has always borrowed from movies, and are greatly inspired by them. I'd love to go back to Vice City, but in a different take to what VC, and VCS had. Rockstar had revisited various cities in the past, but each rendition feel different; like III's Liberty City was not really like IV's take on Liberty City. IV having a bigger focus on characterizing the city, and making it feel more relevant to the time period it is set. GTA III happened on the eve of 9/11, IV was the effect of Post 9/11 disorder/trauma. Time period and relevance were always important to the GTA series, and despite being set on the same city, Rockstar has proven that they can revisit cities, but show them in a different light from their previous efforts. 

 

I'd honestly love to visit other cities within the GTA universe. Boston, Philadelphia, Detroit, Houston are great locations, and are worthy of being in the GTA universe, but it would lose the charm of the other cities shown previously. A Chicago based city (Carcer City) is the only city in the US that has the appeal of the other cities visited in GTA. It also has a big chunk of organized crime too. South Side Chicago has it's infamous gangs, and the wars they spill, the big impact of the different Mob outfits that operate the area, and the overall number of crime related violence that still terror Chicago. Also big, and well known movies are set in Chicago too. Like New York, and Los Angeles it is a city with giant appeal, but has the chops to provide homage to mainstream media, and why it can be a amazing location for a GTA in the foreseeable future.

  • Mister Pink, MiamiViceCity, Official General and 3 others like this

DOUGL4S1
  • DOUGL4S1

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2016
  • Brazil

#12

Posted 24 February 2017 - 10:04 PM

It was amazingly cool to explore the cities in 2D, then in 3D and then in HD, and it was done so we could have that smooth transition between Universes, to have something we're familiar with. To be fair, I'm really satisfied with the level of detail from the HD era, so I see no point on Rockstar revisiting a city again, so it would be fun to explore a new map, but I woudn't be mad with a map on a city we haven't seen on the HD universe yet.

  • Mister Pink, Dan00001, LincolnClay and 1 other like this

Giantsgiants
  • Giantsgiants

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2013
  • Mauritius

#13

Posted 24 February 2017 - 11:19 PM

I'd love to see an entirely new city. But if I'm Rockstar, I'm thinking to myself that it's not that simple.

 

A good GTA city needs to have a large, diverse, unique culture. Not only that, but the GTA playerbase needs to identify with the city and its culture. New York City and Los Angeles have satisfied this criteria. New York City has always been (and still is) a welcome mat for immigrants coming to America. Los Angeles has always been at the forefront when it comes to pop culture worldwide. A person will recognize these cities regardless of which country he lives in.

 

 

  • Mister Pink, Official General, DimitriFaustin and 1 other like this

nkjellman
  • nkjellman

    OG

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2008
  • United-States

#14

Posted 25 February 2017 - 12:05 AM

I'd like to see a GTA set in the GTA universe version of Chicago.

  • GrudgefromSanAndreas likes this

~Tiger~
  • ~Tiger~

  • GTA Series Staff
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2014
  • None
  • Best Ledby 2015
    Best Ledby 2014
    Helpfulness Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [Snapmatic Competition]

#15

Posted 25 February 2017 - 01:01 AM

We haven't had a new GTA city since San Andreas.

 

Ironically the major pre-GTASA leaks all suggested that Bogota would be the setting for the next game (this was a Rockstar smokescreen). Los Santos, San Fierro and Las Venturas were great but we never got Bogota except for a couple of cheeky references.

 

It would be great to see cities from other cultures. Driv3r did it well with Nice and Istanbul (great graphics, terrible gameplay) especially Istanbul.

 

I would particularly like to see a GTA based in Asia (Hong Kong or Shanghai for example) or the Middle East (Dubai would be great) or Europe (Rome, Paris or Berlin) would be fresh and fantastic.

 

These types of cities would kill off Rockstars slightly tired, tedious jibes at American culture and subculture and instead give a whole new set of dynamics; not in terms of gameplay particularly but in terms of context, story, humour and characters.

 

So yes, I personally am a little tired of the same old same old and would love to see new, completely new cities and cultures.

  • Mister Pink, Maibatsu545 and Yinepi like this

Femme Fatale
  • Femme Fatale

    Boy You Make Me Make Bad Decisions

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2014
  • Mexico

#16

Posted 25 February 2017 - 01:20 AM

We haven't had a new GTA city since San Andreas.

 
Ironically the major pre-GTASA leaks all suggested that Bogota would be the setting for the next game (this was a Rockstar smokescreen). Los Santos, San Fierro and Las Venturas were great but we never got Bogota except for a couple of cheeky references.
Huh? What? Where? How?

Seriously, can you show the leaks, and the cheeky references?
  • Mister Pink likes this

TheHumanIsland
  • TheHumanIsland

    See The Eye

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2016
  • United-States

#17

Posted 25 February 2017 - 01:23 AM

No, I'm let down that after LC was revamped, only LS was for SA. I want to see a bigger and better VC, as well as a real SA with 3 cities.

 

I am not tired of the same locations, to me, they are the mainstay of the series.

  • Official General likes this

~Tiger~
  • ~Tiger~

  • GTA Series Staff
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2014
  • None
  • Best Ledby 2015
    Best Ledby 2014
    Helpfulness Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [Snapmatic Competition]

#18

Posted 25 February 2017 - 01:28 AM

Huh? What? Where? How?

Seriously, can you show the leaks, and the cheeky references?

 

There were lots at the time, I can't recall them all but they were mostly this kind of thing: http://uk.ign.com/ar...ters-gta-bogota

 

And the references are on the radio (a SFUR jingle ) and some NPC dialogue.

  • Femme Fatale likes this

MiamiViceCity
  • MiamiViceCity

    Camp Crystal Lake

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Most Obsessive Name Changer 2016 (My unofficial GTAF annual award)
    Biggest Fanboy 2013, 2014, 2015
    Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012

#19

Posted 25 February 2017 - 01:30 AM

I want to see Vice City gets its long, overdue HD makeover, but after that I would like to see R* explore Chicago, Detroit, Boston etc.

 

The idea of rehashing cities doesn't bother me necessarily. Both the Liberty City and Los Santos renditions in HD offer enough unique aspects to make them look and feel different to their predecessor counterparts so it's not just the same cities with better visuals hence going back to Vice City after such a long hiatus I wouldn't find bothersome.

  • Nico, Official General, Gtaman_92 and 7 others like this

Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Pink.Inc

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2004
  • None
  • Best Poster [Music] 2016
    Best Poster [Music] 2015
    Best Poster [Music] 2014
    Most Knowledgeable [Music] 2013
    Best Contributor [Music] 2012

#20

Posted 25 February 2017 - 02:10 AM Edited by Mister Pink, 25 February 2017 - 02:13 AM.

Argh.. Thanks for the good responses people, was going to address each post individually but didn't expect many replies. I'll just make a general post to address some things. 

 

I disagree with people not caring about the the lesser used cities. I mean Las Vegas isn't New York but it's well represented in films like Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas, Casino, Ocean's Eleven, The Godfather II.

 

Great case in point... I'm not sure I heard anyone complain that New Orleans made for a crap location after playing Mafia III. If fact it was universally praised. Now, that game has major flaws but I was getting a new experience one that I haven't felt from a GTA since SA.

 

I watch a lot of films and TV and come from very creative background so I think I can see this opportunity where others don't. Boardwalk Empire got me interested in Atlantic City. Might not be a GTA location but you can see setting things other than Vice City or Liberty City can be fun. I can see it all visually. When I was playing VC, I had only seen Scarface for the first time right after I just completed the story. Not everyone immediately knew it was based on Miami when were were 16/17 or even thought Miami was iconic. Same with GTA III. We knew it was a sort of New York but the gameplay and style of game spoke for itself. 

 

I certainly don't agree that a city must be iconic on a top-three level (Miami/LA/NY) before you can set a GTA there. Because if you can't enjoy a GTA because you didn't recognize the city immediately that says something about the gamer, not the game. GTA is so big it can make cities. Put cities on the map. GTA alone can make a city iconic. 

 

My point is GTA was appealing first and foremost being able to free-roam around a city and steal vehicles and run over people and enjoy fun an interesting story. Those fundamentals wont change if you set it in Boston or Dallas or DC. Besides, any future game set in Seattle or a smaller city than LA or NY is actually going to if not the same size, bigger than the IV's Liberty or V's Los Santos. So what, you don't have the Vinewood sign or Hollywood Boulevard, it's not going to affect gameplay. What it will affect is the feeling of something fresh and new.

 

That's my main point. The difference between playing GTA in the 3D era was exploring those cities was new experience. Playing GTA now is not a new experience but an improved experience. Don't get me wrong, I love New York, I loved exploring Liberty City but I'd also love to explore Boston in a GTA style or a new city in a GTA style. IF that city isn't iconic like New York you can guarantee it will be after Rockstar gets it's dirty paws on it. 

 

As I said in other posts, of course Rockstar is inspired by popular culture but are you guys only getting your culture from those 3 cities? Really? I'm surprised that people want to just chose familiarity over a new experience. No wonder there's been a lack of innovation in gaming. No wonder CoD and Assassin's Creed is so successful because people just want the same thing over and over. 

GTA III, VC, SF, LV and LS were all new experiences at the time. IV is an improvement. It's like a remade III. V too except missing 2 other cities. Where's your desire for a new experience?

 

 

 

 but it would lose the charm of the other cities shown previously. 

 

What charm will be lost? The charm of familiarity? The charm of I've been here before but it looks different? 

 

When San Fierro and Las Venturas were new were you thinking the charm was lost because you aren't in Los Santos, Vice City or Liberty City? :D Come on man. lol

 

I'm not saying ditch those cities.. Those cities will always be there and those are cities covered by GTA over multiple generations and different titles, aside from exploring those cities countless times in other games too. 

 

I'm saying San Andreas as new back in 2004, it's 2017, lets explore a new place now like San Fierro was new back then or like Vice City was new back then lol

 

@Tiger: I loved those games back in the day man, Driver man. Sleeping Dog's Hong Kong was nice for a change. I finally felt like I was exploring somewhere new for change. 

 

I don't have much hope for Rockstar to be honest to try somewhere new. Obviously there's a contingent of people not open the idea. I'm hoping for another developer to take this type of open-world gaming in to the future and let kids keep playing Miami, New York and Vice City for rest of their lives.. I'm joking, remember I love those cities.. just somethings other pussy looks appealing than same old sh*t. 

  • MiamiViceCity, B Dawg, LevelDockSix and 4 others like this

~Tiger~
  • ~Tiger~

  • GTA Series Staff
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2014
  • None
  • Best Ledby 2015
    Best Ledby 2014
    Helpfulness Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [Snapmatic Competition]

#21

Posted 25 February 2017 - 02:26 AM

IV is an improvement. It's like a remade III.


Bang, you hit the nail on the head there Mister Pink.

I played GTA III then I played Driver Parallel Lines (set in New York) and then ...GTA IV.

 

I know this is an unpopular opinion but my reaction to IV was 'Oh no...not f*cking New York again.

  • Mister Pink, TheHumanIsland and Yinepi like this

Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Pink.Inc

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2004
  • None
  • Best Poster [Music] 2016
    Best Poster [Music] 2015
    Best Poster [Music] 2014
    Most Knowledgeable [Music] 2013
    Best Contributor [Music] 2012

#22

Posted 25 February 2017 - 02:44 AM Edited by Mister Pink, 25 February 2017 - 02:46 AM.

 

IV is an improvement. It's like a remade III.


Bang, you hit the nail on the head there Mister Pink.

I played GTA III then I played Driver Parallel Lines (set in New York) and then ...GTA IV.

 

I know this is an unpopular opinion but my reaction to IV was 'Oh no...not f*cking New York again.

 

 

Glad someone agrees and New York is my favourite city and by extension I love Liberty City but that's exactly how it played out for me too. 

 

III in 2001, Parallel Lines in 2006 and then GTA IV in 2007. Although I remember a few people complaining about that back then, I never thought there was any harm. Imagine then with GTA V, before that I was playing San Andreas, Midnight Club L.A. L.A. Noire and then Los Santos in GTA V again.

 

I get for some people newer to GTA or that don't play other games other than GTA it's not bad but for those of us that play other games it becomes a bit monotonous. 

 

Imagine all films and TV were set in the same 3 cities, lol

  • TheHumanIsland and DimitriFaustin like this

TheHumanIsland
  • TheHumanIsland

    See The Eye

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2016
  • United-States

#23

Posted 25 February 2017 - 02:45 AM Edited by TheHumanIsland, 25 February 2017 - 02:49 AM.

Totally, I was worried at first with IV but was blown away when I played it.

 

Niko is even an HD claude speed, same outfit is possible through the playboy-X choices, where claude is a mute, Niko is a more defined version whereas he can barely understand certain accents (jacob, badman) and has trouble communicating. It was so cool, it went from the world all the way down to the player's individual character, a "new build", new version of GTA III.

 

I fully expected that of V, but I don't think we got it, it went to a more arcadey "reality show" from rendering to storytelling, and I really miss the filmic value IV had, it was like everything III-era GTA's wanted to be, or seemed they would one day achieve, and then V, which I do love and I like online enough too, it just didn't wow me. It does look better apple to apples, 1080p, clearer, better textures, but IV remaster would, for me, rock GTA V's socks off, even missing all those cool new features, IV looks great at 1080p, I can only imagine what it would have been like if they didn't hold back the "very high" texture setting on PC (made sense to do it though, it performed pretty badly maxed out even on good hardware back then). 

 

As for charm, I think I am saying something different than the guy who mentioned that here, but I think LC and LS both carry the most charm in the series, because they mirror "so much" of the media locations we know of. There's not a lot of stuff in Philly, Chicago, Detroit - what DOES take place in those cities tend to be classics and highly regarded great films, but "everything" is in LC and LS. I wonder if that's why they skipped SF and LV for V? 

 

I have a conspiritard theory that Watch Dogs bought their map unfinished xD It just looks SO MUCH like san fierro would look :p Same landmarks and such, from vids I watched anyhow. I know it's not possible, but I wonder if R* "revamped" LS so much from beta til now because they omitted "the rest of the map" after they found out Watch Dogs was doing SanFran. Like, so much changed in a short period of V's development, maybe they did that to avoid being overshadowed in part of the map. Maybe it's not related at all, just a tangent, pay no mind :p

  • MiamiViceCity, TheOneLibertonian and SonicTheSexhog like this

DimitriFaustin
  • DimitriFaustin

    Anywhere City Survivor

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Mar 2016
  • United-States

#24

Posted 25 February 2017 - 02:51 AM Edited by DimitriFaustin, 25 February 2017 - 03:00 AM.

Based on my own personal experience with the Grand Theft Auto series and the vast majority I've seen on this forum (so far), I'd say that a lot of GTA fans

are nostalgia-blinded and have a huge mental stronghold for a particular rendition of a certain GTA setting (i.e. Liberty City in III and IV, Vice City in the '80s and Los Santos in SA more so than V).

My best advice I can ever give to Rockstar is this: you're not going to please everyone, so it's best to stick to your own guts. After all, no guts, no glory.

 

The reason I say there's a certain mentality amongst GTA fans is because the attitude I've seen here from the times I was lurking around (that started in 2010 or 2011, I don't completely remember)

to when I found the courage within myself to join last year is that it seems like since the HD universe started with IV, whatever Rockstar does isn't good enough for some fans. I've seen this evolve

from people who complained that IV was too much like III and too dark and gritty for their own liking to folks blasting V to high heck and water because it wasn't exactly as they imagined it. Not to discredit

all the arguments that are logical and understandable, but a lot of times I just wish folks were more grateful to even have a Grand Theft Auto game.

If Vice City was to come back and be in a modern, 2010s setting, people would be going totally haywire because it wasn't the 1980s or an exact HD recreation of the Tommy Vercetti days. Likewise,

if Rockstar remade the 3D Vice City completely into the HD format, there'd be complaints going out the window.

Another example is that right now I've been doing an HD concept in the map-making topic of Anywhere City, or the GTA 2 setting. Depending upon how much of a stronghold people have for the original

setting in GTA 2, not everyone acquainted with GTA 2 is going to like it. As the old saying goes, you win some and you lose some.

 

Am I tired of Rockstar re-using old settings? No, not even close. Would I like to see new settings burst free from the people who given us these awesome games? That would be greatly appreciated, but

I'm not holding my breath over it. I'm just trying to say that whether it's new or it's re-hashed, it's a video game environment that gives us an escape from the drudgeries of normal life, and should therefore

be given the proper respect it deserves. Liberty City, Vice City, Los Santos, Anywhere City, they're just worlds begging to be explored and enjoyed and appreciated.


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#25

Posted 25 February 2017 - 03:23 AM

 

IV is an improvement. It's like a remade III.


Bang, you hit the nail on the head there Mister Pink.

I played GTA III then I played Driver Parallel Lines (set in New York) and then ...GTA IV.

 

I know this is an unpopular opinion but my reaction to IV was 'Oh no...not f*cking New York again.

 

 

But except you're kinda wrong. IV was the first time Rockstar based their GTA etting entirely on New York City. III LC was not a true GTA-styled rendition of NYC, it was only influenced by it to some degree, it was largely supposed to be a generic, large East Coast US city. Rockstar said this themselves, so it made perfect sense for them wanting to do NYC properly with IV.

  • vnus_dmlo, Journey_95, The Deadite and 1 other like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#26

Posted 25 February 2017 - 07:18 AM Edited by Osho, 25 February 2017 - 07:20 AM.

I'd say that a lot of GTA fans are nostalgia-blinded [ .. ] it seems like since the HD universe started with IV, whatever Rockstar does isn't good enough for some fans


Its so convenient to say these criticisms are largely just pure and simple nostalgia, but my friend, Rockstar is the one playing with the nostalgia card here to make us think of the old days by re-using the same cities which offered some of the great experiences in the past. It feels closer in spirit to the original cities, and less of a complete reimagining. Its more rehashing of the old ones with a modern spin that'll still invoke a feeling of nostalgia for the 3D era long gone.


Those who have either never touched any of the old games because they are so engulfed into the MMO crap they just don't care about SP, or its been way too long since they last played them that they generally tend to accept whatever R* throws at them in the name of "single player" and wouldn't mind a rehash, can't see how much of LC and LS looks like a complete rip-off.


When I analyse the modern LC and LS and compare them with the old ones, then it becomes immediately obvious to me that there's too much reuse of the same stories, characters, features, dialogues, mission types, etc.

Sure the world looks really stunning with lots of details in them, but at the same time the formula these modern cities follow is just overcooked by this point. They do not greatly improve to differentiate them from the old ones which is why this topic exists.
How many more years should we tolerate without much freedom nor interesting ways to interact with the world, but just watch them play out in motion captured cutscenes?

Liberty city and Los Santos are pretty much repeating the same things we have been experiencing for over many years now.

The way Liberty city in GTA IV has been created is more like playing GTA III using a new engine. Rockstar's attempt to recreate the city that's photorealistic and feels like a modern New York urban environment is admirable.

But its not so much of "returning to Liberty city to originate and innovate for keeping things fresh" as it is "reusing Liberty city and then turning it into a more living, breathing city" that players can appreciate for all the details, and landmarks, but the city itself doesn't contain enough to interest me from content, and gameplay standpoint.
If they simply wanted to deliver a photorealistic copy of New York city to immerse myself with the overall architecture, and physics, then they could have simply released a remaster of same GTA III.

You can't expect me to be more "grateful" for even having a GTA game, if in terms of world building there's so much potential wasted in modern Liberty city, which they have simply created to make it "look" like a real city, but still suffers from many of the same design 'flaws' that completely break the realism and immersion the moment I try to interact in a meaningful way, and become more creative inside the world. They're hardly original even after re-using Liberty city for what? 4 games or so?

Similarly Los Santos looks great, but that's all there's to it. As a SP, there's not much to talk about the city that I didn't experience back in 2004.

I am not trying to downplay LC or LS, but want to highlight that these modern cities are poorly executed to match that level of improvements and additions in making them worth returning to stay interested in playing them longer than how much I still enjoy the old ones for months without any need for SP DLC and/or Online.

Just reusing old cities for fancy graphics with an excruciating amount of details, and better physics, does not make them effective, bevause they don't bother to expand upon the overall structure and gameplay design for giving more reasons to enjoy these cities. They have no depth and do not evolve the way Online has evolved over the past titles.

The challenge lies in when you consider a new city, and work hard in terms of creating something that "feels" better than their past offerings for us to analyse and judge their maturty and growth as a developer after spending so many years in the industry.

There's not so much of the baggage of past experiences in the players mind with a new city when it comes to its history, politics, organised criminal culture, people and general gaming knowledge, etc that comes from having already experienced a city before.
  • Official General, TheHumanIsland and Yinepi like this

Pink Pineapple
  • Pink Pineapple

    ________________________________________________________________

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2016
  • None

#27

Posted 25 February 2017 - 07:44 AM

I want them to create HD versions of Vice City, Las Venturas, and San Fierro. Also, I hope LV and SF are in the same game together as Northern San Andreas.

 

I don't play many games, so I'm not sick of those locations like some of you are. After they get those cities done, then they should create a new U.S. based city. I don't think other countries would be a good fit for GTA at this point.

  • Official General, DIEXEL, Journey_95 and 2 others like this

MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#28

Posted 25 February 2017 - 08:14 AM

After all these Fake GTA 6 Trailers on Youtube. San Fierro should not be GTA 6. Those Click-Bait videos ruined it for all of us and dont want them to right after 5 years. Hopefully still get GTA 6 in 2018.


UnknownDivision
  • UnknownDivision

    Dont mess

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2016
  • United-States

#29

Posted 25 February 2017 - 08:15 AM

I definitely agree, a lot of people don't agree but I think they should even change the country. I think it would be so cool if It was in London.


TheHumanIsland
  • TheHumanIsland

    See The Eye

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2016
  • United-States

#30

Posted 25 February 2017 - 08:29 AM Edited by TheHumanIsland, 26 February 2017 - 12:32 AM.

deleted





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users