Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Are You Tired of Re-Used Cities?

127 replies to this topic
one55
  • one55

    Nigguh!

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2013
  • Scotland

#61

Posted 12 March 2017 - 05:57 PM

yep. i'm tired of liberty city mostly. if we never visited it again i'd be happy. i was excited Los Santos was GTA V. to be fair i wouldn't mind if the next GTA games focused on San Fierro/Las Venturas but it's about time they make a new location.

  • Mister Pink, BurnettVice and KYX like this

MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#62

Posted 12 March 2017 - 07:02 PM

yep. i'm tired of liberty city mostly. if we never visited it again i'd be happy. i was excited Los Santos was GTA V. to be fair i wouldn't mind if the next GTA games focused on Vice City /Las Venturas but it's about time they make a new location.

Fixed*


NearExpansion
  • NearExpansion

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#63

Posted 12 March 2017 - 08:37 PM

R* could go beyond the USA surely?  Max Payne 3 showed they could look beyond North America.  Why not an African or Asian setting for the next one?  If they do go American for GTA 6, a return to Vice City would be fine for me.


Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Viewfinder

  • 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

#64

Posted 13 March 2017 - 12:44 AM Edited by Mister Pink, 13 March 2017 - 12:50 AM.

 

I would love a HD Las Venturas or San Fierro, I guess I'm precarious about Vice City because a remade in Vice City wont focus on the things I loved about the original VC. It wont be pastel suits, fast cars and 1980s glam. While I'm glad Rockstar will do something new with it, I may not like the new.A bit like Rockstar doing modern LA. Modern L.A. isn't really interesting to me like and early 90s South Central with a wealth of films from then to draw from. Same with Vice City... We all know what the 80s were for Miami. What is the modern equivalent for that? Those games were so unique and set in a time that was unique and almost historic, particularly in pop culture.I hope Rockstar focuses their attention on that special time and place rather than generically HD rebuilding of cities in modern form. Like they're forgetting about the art and doing something outside the box.

 

@ MisterPink

 

I too will admit that I was not very excited about a modern-day LS in V on first discovering the location, namely because it didn't have much to offer in terms of exciting and interesting real-life material based on what happens in modern-day LA. Modern day LA has nothing exceptional or fascinating about it, the whole LA mystique and magic has all been seen and done before and it's played out now. LA still has a lot of gang life/culture, hoods, drugs, gun crime, and all that, but it's no longer sensationalised in the media like it used to be and the most fascinating period for that stuff was the 90s, which SA so brilliantly portrayed.

 

But modern-day Miami, to me still wealth of references and material to draw from. Miami has blossomed more than ever into a world-renowned, world-famous, supreme, tropical paradise, a metropolis that's the ultimate playground for the rich and wealthy, the famous, the glamorous, party revellers, its a sprawling urban center that acts as the main gateway to Latin America, there is the Miami beachfront, nightlife, it's hip hop scene and it's money-flashin' blingin' rappers and strip club sub-culture a la Rick Ross etc, then....the dark side with it's still ever-present drug trade, the extremely violent and high rates of gun crime in it's ghettos, the Hispanic drug traffickers and street gangs, the Haitian gangs and the usual African American gangs. The tons of fast, sports and flashy cars cruising around the city, it's got it all. A HD version of VC would do it great justice.

 

 

For sure man. All the things you mentioned to draw inspiration from is cool and I like all that. I know I will enjoy a modern day Miami GTA. I'm not disagreeing with anyone on that. It's just not my preference to have 3 modern GTA's in a row (points I made clear in other topics) and my preference will be for a new city. It's using that principle before anything else. New city, possible non modern-day.

 

The main reason I started the topic was because I realised how sick of LA I am as it's over-represented in many games, movies and TV shows. I'm not criticizing the city. I'm talking about keeping a game fresh. Exploring new territories. I'm not being negative about Vice City, nor am I wanting an 80's Vice City as str8up seems to imply. I don't see it as being "awful" either. I just think a return to 80's Miami wouldn't be a fresh new idea, would it?

 

80's Miami was a fresh new idea. 90's Los Angeles was a fresh new idea. Modern New York isn't as fresh and new idea and either is current LA.  1980's Las Venturas is a fresh new idea for me. Because I've never seen another game do that. 80s/90s Boston is a fresh new place for me, for the same reason. 

 

I've played Scarface, Vice City, Vice City Stories, Driv3r and The Crew. I've been to Miami a few times in open-world video games. It's fun, I love it. But again, the principle is that I want to go somewhere that is almost alien to me. Brand-spanking-new and preferably not covered by another game. Not saying Vice City is crap, not saying I will never want to see it in Liberty City again.. they're great cities... that's why a lot of stuff gets set there. But it's a double-edged sword. There's so many games in those places, where's the originality? 

 

It's very simple. I follow a lifestyle that favours variety. I like to eat different meals every day. I like to listen many different styles of music. I like to change my haircut. I like to play many different genres of games etc. When playing games I like original ideas and variety of location. It's not to say another location is bad. Also, 3 modern day GTA's, with the same style cars, same fashion, same content on political views.. meh. I got hooked on GTA because one year I was in Liberty around 2001, next game in in Vice in 1986, next game I'm in Los Santos, San Fierro, Las Venturas in 1992. Clothes, cars, variety of location, everything was so different. Now it's modern day car IV, slightly modified but not so different version of that car in the next modern day game, multiplayer and shark cards oh and in-game internet and cell-phones, like I need more of that sh*t in my life. People are still playing a lot. If I go to a modern Miami, i'm just coming from a place of palm trees and sun to another place of palm-trees and sun and there's going to be feck-all difference in clothes, cars, weapons etc because there's not much time-difference and visually the colour-palette is going to be relatively the same  as Southern California. That's a little boring to me. If I didn't care like I do, I would be happy to play Call of Duty where I can have lack of variety and innovation. Actually, I take that back, they tried something new last time.

  • Jabalous and Neon_Dreaming like this

PaddsterG2k3
  • PaddsterG2k3

    The Bee's Knees

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2003

#65

Posted 13 March 2017 - 10:27 AM Edited by PaddsterG2k3, 13 March 2017 - 10:29 AM.

Tbh I think if Rockstar was smart they'd opt for a mid-2000s setting. This would add some nostalgia and period theme in terms of music which has been so badly missed since SA (imo). If they then coupled with say Vice State and a cross Ocean foreign city (London or somewhere in Latin America) I think they'd be back on top and please lots of people. The use of Mexico in RDR was great and I feel Rockstar should use a similar idea in terms of location in VI. Miami/VC's Atlantic/Caribbean location would be ideal for this.

Maybe I'm just dreaming though?

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#66

Posted 13 March 2017 - 11:00 AM

If I go to a modern Miami, i'm just coming from a place of palm trees and sun to another place of palm-trees and sun and there's going to be feck-all difference in clothes, cars, weapons etc because there's not much time-difference and visually the colour-palette is going to be relatively the same  as Southern California. That's a little boring to me.

 

 

That's a fair point, but nobody complained when we visited San Andreas after Vice City, it was stepping out of one great experience in an amazing, in-game world and into another. There was not a problem then, and I don't see why there should be a problem now. If the next GTA was set in Chicago, many people guaranteed will complain it feels too much like Liberty City, and like you, will say its a bit boring, since by GTA chronological standards, LC was done not too long ago in IV&EFLC. Many American cities will always have other American cities that similar in look to them, which is no surprise considering the huge size of the USA. It's just one of those things that have to be overlooked when playing games like GTA, whose locations are based on real-life American cities.

 

And even then, there are many distinct differences between Miami and LA, they are far from similar actually. Apart from palm trees, rich lifestyles and sunny weather, there is not much else similarity. Miami is more tropical, while LA is more Mediterranean.


BrownBear
  • BrownBear

    Moonraker.

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2009
  • United-Kingdom

#67

Posted 15 March 2017 - 02:25 PM

 

 

I would love a HD Las Venturas or San Fierro, I guess I'm precarious about Vice City because a remade in Vice City wont focus on the things I loved about the original VC. It wont be pastel suits, fast cars and 1980s glam. While I'm glad Rockstar will do something new with it, I may not like the new.A bit like Rockstar doing modern LA. Modern L.A. isn't really interesting to me like and early 90s South Central with a wealth of films from then to draw from. Same with Vice City... We all know what the 80s were for Miami. What is the modern equivalent for that? Those games were so unique and set in a time that was unique and almost historic, particularly in pop culture.I hope Rockstar focuses their attention on that special time and place rather than generically HD rebuilding of cities in modern form. Like they're forgetting about the art and doing something outside the box.

 

@ MisterPink

 

I too will admit that I was not very excited about a modern-day LS in V on first discovering the location, namely because it didn't have much to offer in terms of exciting and interesting real-life material based on what happens in modern-day LA. Modern day LA has nothing exceptional or fascinating about it, the whole LA mystique and magic has all been seen and done before and it's played out now. LA still has a lot of gang life/culture, hoods, drugs, gun crime, and all that, but it's no longer sensationalised in the media like it used to be and the most fascinating period for that stuff was the 90s, which SA so brilliantly portrayed.

 

But modern-day Miami, to me still wealth of references and material to draw from. Miami has blossomed more than ever into a world-renowned, world-famous, supreme, tropical paradise, a metropolis that's the ultimate playground for the rich and wealthy, the famous, the glamorous, party revellers, its a sprawling urban center that acts as the main gateway to Latin America, there is the Miami beachfront, nightlife, it's hip hop scene and it's money-flashin' blingin' rappers and strip club sub-culture a la Rick Ross etc, then....the dark side with it's still ever-present drug trade, the extremely violent and high rates of gun crime in it's ghettos, the Hispanic drug traffickers and street gangs, the Haitian gangs and the usual African American gangs. The tons of fast, sports and flashy cars cruising around the city, it's got it all. A HD version of VC would do it great justice.

 

 

For sure man. All the things you mentioned to draw inspiration from is cool and I like all that. I know I will enjoy a modern day Miami GTA. I'm not disagreeing with anyone on that. It's just not my preference to have 3 modern GTA's in a row (points I made clear in other topics) and my preference will be for a new city. It's using that principle before anything else. New city, possible non modern-day.

 

The main reason I started the topic was because I realised how sick of LA I am as it's over-represented in many games, movies and TV shows. I'm not criticizing the city. I'm talking about keeping a game fresh. Exploring new territories. I'm not being negative about Vice City, nor am I wanting an 80's Vice City as str8up seems to imply. I don't see it as being "awful" either. I just think a return to 80's Miami wouldn't be a fresh new idea, would it?

 

80's Miami was a fresh new idea. 90's Los Angeles was a fresh new idea. Modern New York isn't as fresh and new idea and either is current LA.  1980's Las Venturas is a fresh new idea for me. Because I've never seen another game do that. 80s/90s Boston is a fresh new place for me, for the same reason. 

 

I've played Scarface, Vice City, Vice City Stories, Driv3r and The Crew. I've been to Miami a few times in open-world video games. It's fun, I love it. But again, the principle is that I want to go somewhere that is almost alien to me. Brand-spanking-new and preferably not covered by another game. Not saying Vice City is crap, not saying I will never want to see it in Liberty City again.. they're great cities... that's why a lot of stuff gets set there. But it's a double-edged sword. There's so many games in those places, where's the originality? 

 

It's very simple. I follow a lifestyle that favours variety. I like to eat different meals every day. I like to listen many different styles of music. I like to change my haircut. I like to play many different genres of games etc. When playing games I like original ideas and variety of location. It's not to say another location is bad. Also, 3 modern day GTA's, with the same style cars, same fashion, same content on political views.. meh. I got hooked on GTA because one year I was in Liberty around 2001, next game in in Vice in 1986, next game I'm in Los Santos, San Fierro, Las Venturas in 1992. Clothes, cars, variety of location, everything was so different. Now it's modern day car IV, slightly modified but not so different version of that car in the next modern day game, multiplayer and shark cards oh and in-game internet and cell-phones, like I need more of that sh*t in my life. People are still playing a lot. If I go to a modern Miami, i'm just coming from a place of palm trees and sun to another place of palm-trees and sun and there's going to be feck-all difference in clothes, cars, weapons etc because there's not much time-difference and visually the colour-palette is going to be relatively the same  as Southern California. That's a little boring to me. If I didn't care like I do, I would be happy to play Call of Duty where I can have lack of variety and innovation. Actually, I take that back, they tried something new last time.

 

 

I think a lot of how the city feels depends on the art direction, which I wasn't a huge fan of. Rockstar has a tendency to accentuate certain colours, I can definitely see Vice City being heavy on deep blacks and neon pinks and purples. This adds a lot to the tone and feel of the city.

 

As for the city itself though, I'd say there's a pretty big difference. V's map was dry and scrubby for the most part, Vice City would be humid and tropical. I think they could do so much with a VC map, recreating the Miami Metro area, a long string of sun bleached city, endless beaches, pumping drug fuelled nightclubs, hellish ghettos rotting in the tropical humidity, gated mansion communities, dozens of scattered islands, vast swamps, turquoise waters. 

 

Also, the tone and characters of the cities are very different. LA is rich, glitzy and superficial, Miami is like a cross between the American South and the Caribbean, flooded with guns, cocaine and money.

  • Mister Pink, Jabalous, Official General and 2 others like this

PaddsterG2k3
  • PaddsterG2k3

    The Bee's Knees

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2003

#68

Posted 15 March 2017 - 04:46 PM

Plus with VC there is scope to do Vice State with the Everglades, the Keys and a mock version of Orlando and the theme park culture.
  • Official General and AmigaMix like this

MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#69

Posted 15 March 2017 - 04:57 PM

Plus with VC there is scope to do Vice State with the Everglades, the Keys and a mock version of Orlando and the theme park culture.

i'll say the same with Las Vegas. There is Red Rock Canyon, Mt. Charleston, Area 51, Area 51 Gas Station, Hoover Dam, Lake Mead, Abandoned Places, The Strip and Fremont St.  

  • AmigaMix likes this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#70

Posted 15 March 2017 - 07:18 PM

@ BrownBear

 

Exactly - there is a massive difference between Los Angeles and Miami, in almsot every way. Climate, natural environment, urban layout and design, demographics, culture, lifestyle, the two places are very different. The only similarities are the fact that they both have hot, sunny weather most times of the year.

  • AmigaMix likes this

AmigaMix
  • AmigaMix

    human being

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2016
  • Germany

#71

Posted 16 March 2017 - 05:05 AM

i'll say the same with Las Vegas. There is Red Rock Canyon, Mt. Charleston, Area 51, Area 51 Gas Station, Hoover Dam, Lake Mead, Abandoned Places, The Strip and Fremont St.  

 

Would be hilarious if a GTA set in Las Vegas/surroundings had a better forest area than GTA V.  :lol:

  • Roger Cheeto likes this

Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Viewfinder

  • 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

#72

Posted 18 March 2017 - 03:58 PM Edited by Mister Pink, 18 March 2017 - 04:04 PM.

 

If I go to a modern Miami, i'm just coming from a place of palm trees and sun to another place of palm-trees and sun and there's going to be feck-all difference in clothes, cars, weapons etc because there's not much time-difference and visually the colour-palette is going to be relatively the same  as Southern California. That's a little boring to me.

 

 

That's a fair point, but nobody complained when we visited San Andreas after Vice City, it was stepping out of one great experience in an amazing, in-game world and into another. There was not a problem then, and I don't see why there should be a problem now. If the next GTA was set in Chicago, many people guaranteed will complain it feels too much like Liberty City, and like you, will say its a bit boring, since by GTA chronological standards, LC was done not too long ago in IV&EFLC. Many American cities will always have other American cities that similar in look to them, which is no surprise considering the huge size of the USA. It's just one of those things that have to be overlooked when playing games like GTA, whose locations are based on real-life American cities.

 

And even then, there are many distinct differences between Miami and LA, they are far from similar actually. Apart from palm trees, rich lifestyles and sunny weather, there is not much else similarity. Miami is more tropical, while LA is more Mediterranean.

 

 

Yes, but we were also going from one city to 3 new cities, each with varying weather depending on where you are (San Fierro fog). We weren't returning to previously made 3D cities. 

 

And your second point is fair enough given some of cities will look the same and it's thing we'll have to accept, that's true but I'm only using that argument in the case of going from V's Los Santos back to VI Vice City.

 

But yeah I suppose there's the more tropical element of Miami and you can say L.A. seems more Mediterranean but my point is going to be similar colour palette. Blue skys, green tropics and beige or white buildings. It's a hot-weather environment, meaning people in Tshirts and shorts again, long sunny days, no snow, frost or big overcoats..although you could get them in V and look stupid running around in hot weather.

 

I loved the stark contrast of going form grey Liberty City to bright and colourful Vice City. That was a big change. And when you got tired from playing Vice City and went back to III, visually they were polar opposites. Popping in V coming back from imagined new Vice City, I highly doubt would have that same contrast. I'm not saying I'm right, you are wrong, these things are important to me for keeping a game looking unique and feeling unique. 

 

On Chicago, yeah I may be cautiously optmositic I've just came from IV's Liberty City to Watch Dog's Chicago so it's kind of fresh in my head but GTA hasn't been there yet so I might get excited over it. I'm on the fence. Unless it can distinguish itself from Liberty City and Watch Dogs by being set in the 80's.  As I keep mentioning Boston is an east coast city which would be new as I have only played Fallout 4 there but it's set in the year 2287 after nuclear fallout so it hardly counts. 

 

To sum it up.. 

 

My principles in desires to keep GTA fresh is to keep the timeline alternating from present to the past, using new cities the longest time before returning to old cities while also refraining from cities as much as possible that have been covered by competitor titles in the genre such as Mafia or Watch Dogs. That's almost a formula I personally would stick to distinguish myself from competition but more importantly for a true sense of variety.

 

I would try refrain from having multiple/consecutively modern-day GTA's, consecutively using previously used cities in a GTA as has been the case since the HD era. 

  • Jabalous, Zello, The7thOne and 1 other like this

MojoGamer
  • MojoGamer

    Savage

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2011
  • None

#73

Posted 18 March 2017 - 04:27 PM

I personally don't want GTA 6 to be set in the 80's or Past. Only way I see it happening is threw another "Prolounge" tutorial mission, like in the beginning of GTA 5. C'mon GTAs just a game, so it can have Snow every Christmas Special. RDR2 is set in the Past. Thats ok since, we only see cowboys on television. But for GTA a unique look, would feel boring like Mafia 3. I'm an adrenaline junkie, so i'll like some modern theme with "Advanced Warfare" like CoD:AW. Give us that and show us "the sky is not the limit." Sh*t people in the past say, "Its a bird, its a plane, its your imagination." 


Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Viewfinder

  • 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

#74

Posted 18 March 2017 - 05:09 PM Edited by Mister Pink, 18 March 2017 - 05:12 PM.

I don't know if you are trolling by that post or you just don't really care that much. My argument is pushing for variety to keep GTA fresh. Some of us played GTA before GTA IV. :p GTA was huge before IV and when it was the 3D era, 2 out of the main 3 GTA's were set in the past and people loved it! That was back when Rockstar weren't afraid to got to a new city and the time line varied from 80's, 90's to 00's. That meant if in one from one GTA to the next, they not only looked visually different ie. one Sentinel in III, looked very different in Vice City. It was almost like getting a new car. As apposed to driving an Infernus in IV, to driving an Infernus in V.  I guess you could call me an adrenaline junkie because I like to experience new things, not drive in the same model of car from roughly the same time. 

 

 

But for GTA a unique look, would feel boring like Mafia 3

 

I'm not sure what you mean. Looking unique is boring?  Or you think Mafia III looks unique and you thought Mafia III was boring in which case it still doesn't mean unique = boring. 

 

 

C'mon GTAs just a game, so it can have Snow every Christmas Special.

 

If it's just a game, they why respond? Why join the forum? ...Again, my argument is promoting variety, the kind of variety we saw in the III era. It's not snow, I'm specifically going after, it's moving the game from one hot, sunny environment to another consecutively. We know they can do snow in GTA meaning that future GTA's may have seasonal weather. If GTA is set from Los Santos then to Vice, then to San Fierro you think that's going to leave any room for snow  or any weather variety other than mostly sun except for your one Christmas Online thing? Again, that's besides the point I was making. It's not about the snow, it's about variety, change of scenery, climate, always sunny, always t-shirts and bright colours etc. 

 

 

Give us that and show us "the sky is not the limit." Sh*t people in the past say, "Its a bird, its a plane, its your imagination."

 

What?! Not sure what you are talking about but here's some food for thought. In 1969, the US flew to the moon. Only 25 years or less before that, I think you could say Hitler would have felt the sky wasn't the limit. People had ambition in the past.

 

If you disagree with my argument that variety and uniqueness in GTA is a bad then then please try refute me. But if you are just replying for the sake of replying and don't feel passionately about the points for or against then don't bother. 

  • Official General, Roger Cheeto, Mr. Fartenhate and 1 other like this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#75

Posted 19 March 2017 - 01:05 AM Edited by Official General, 21 March 2017 - 07:21 PM.

@ Mister Pink

* Fair point, when we went from VC to SA, they were both new cities covering new themes not done before in GTA at the time. So I guess the similarities wouldn't really have been felt.

* You are right about the color palette and sunny atmosphere of the environment in V's LS would be probably similar to the one that would be seen in a modern VC. But that for me is a very minor issue regarding concerns of repetition, as it's not something that would significantly impact my enjoyment of the game. I'd be way too excited over the prospect of a detailed, stunningly designed modern-day VC to be bothered about the few similarities it's environment has to LS. Azure/turquoise blue waters, dense tropical vegetation and swamps, bright, neon-lit beachfront nightclubs and bars, thriving Cuban/Latin/Caribbean cultures, and lifestyles, and more all in modern HD glory, this stuff that LS don't have, so I'd still be excited for it.

 

* I just cannot see Rockstar choosing Boston alone for a GTA setting for obvious reasons, it's not big or popular enough and not as recognizable as other main cities they've used before. It would have been great being on the same map as LC in IV though, I'd have loved a 3 city version of IV's map - New York, New Jersey and Boston, with other areas in between, would have been great, but that ship sailed a long time ago.

* I'd like to see Chicago in GTA, but just not right now. At some later point, most definitely, it would be perfect.

* I just can't really see any other viable past eras that Rockstar can use for a new GTA that they haven't used already. I'm not really keen on the 1970s as most of what they could cover for that era is the classic older Mafia era, and that means a return to Liberty City which I don't want again so soon. I don't see anything special about orgainzed crime and gangs in 1960s America, as everything they did at that time was mostly stable and consolidated, and again, it would involve mostly Mafia stuff. Just my opinion, I'd rather modern day for now.

  • Mister Pink and BrownBear like this

The7thOne
  • The7thOne

    ● ← Hole to another universe

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 May 2014
  • United-States

#76

Posted 22 March 2017 - 02:08 PM

That's the problem that GTA has had for a while now - remaking old cities. It essentially removes any potential new stories and ideas that could be told because each city is probably associated with a certain theme in one way or another. Vice City will always be looked at as the drug/kingpin de facto standard. Las Venturas will always be the gambling capital of GTA. Los Santos is semi-ambiguous in this regard but because of GTA V people will associate it with heists.

 

That's why I'm all for a new city/location all together - give us a new theme and new stereotypes to play through. If anything, redoing old cities makes more sense for GTA Online - put all of the efforts towards new cities in standalone installments - that's how I would do it.

 

I'm not against seeing old cities redone, I just wish we could have more room to work with for GTA.

  • Mister Pink likes this

Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Viewfinder

  • 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

#77

Posted 03 April 2017 - 07:32 PM

....I'm not against seeing old cities redone, I just wish we could have more room to work with for GTA.

 

Good points but really, this is what I want to stress. I'm not against it either, I'm just proposing an argument based on my thoughts and evidence by previous titles. Especially when I see how loved Vice City and San Andreas are in the community, especially those of us that grew up with the series. 

 

 

(Official General) * I just can't really see any other viable past eras that Rockstar can use for a new GTA that they haven't used already. I'm not really keen on the 1970s as most of what they could cover for that era is the classic older Mafia era, and that means a return to Liberty City which I don't want again so soon. I don't see anything special about orgainzed crime and gangs in 1960s America, as everything they did at that time was mostly stable and consolidated, and again, it would involve mostly Mafia stuff. Just my opinion, I'd rather modern day for now.

 

You make some interesting points in your last post but I'll focus on this for the moment. Just because you can't see viable eras, does not negate their being eras to use that are satisfactory or interesting. I'm happy San Andreas exists because it's unique as a videogame. It stands out in it's theme because there's no other game set in 1992, South Central extending to 3 cities. It's just bizarrely unique. It's not comparable by time and place and even particular features to another game. Now, there's members here that just dislike that theme. In fact initially I wasn't impressed with gangbanger theme. I thought I disliked that culture, even though I was somewhat fascinated by that gang culture. I learned to love it eventually. But to other members, if you proposed the idea of San Andreas to them back in 2002 they would have shunned it and said it was a bad idea. I don't think it's because it makes for bad gameplay but purely because it's just not a theme they like. It's a personal preference which is perfectly fine but saying it's not worth doing, for me is isn't logical. I think the cultural depiction of that time and place, that cultural relevance of Vice City and San Andreas meets and possibly exceeds anything a modern game can do, especially 3 modern day games in a row. 

 

Lets not forget that if VI is set in contemporary times, it will be the 3rd major GTA title since 2008 set in current times as apposed to III to VC to San Andreas. That's 10 years of little variation in visual style, cars, clothes, architecture aside from the politics of the day, cultural attitudes of the time etc. Modern GTA's is bit like the stand-up comedian that does current affairs, celeb take-downs and hot topics of the time. Its funny in the moment but when you see it a year or two later it's dated. Setting it in the past offers hindsight. Whatever is going on there, we know how it plays out. We can step outside the culture and look at it with a magnifying glass and rightly go, yeah that was bullsh*t or yeah that person was ignored then but they were actually right, look how things turned out. 

 

I'm getting side-tracked with era stuff. When I compare the freshness of a GTA back then compared to now, I'm left thinking what the fundamental differences were.

 

1.Major GTA's of the III era were set in 00's, 86, 92. This gave us plenty of variety, one example I use is cars and how different they are between each title due to the difference in the years the games took place in. Same for clothing and fashion. 

 

2. The cities were new cities for a GTA at the time. For example, how many of us explored Miami for the first time as Vice City through GTA. That was a first-time experience, right? Since then we've driven through Miami in Driv3r, The Crew, Scarface, Hardline and more. The first time I drove through New York in a GTA-style game was with III. Then Driver: PL, True Crime: NY then IV. That's just GTA style games as well, not like all the other games set there too. I love NY so no disrespect but it's just my point of first time experience. San Fran, Las Vegas, the first time was in GTA for me.

 

3. Extended time between titles. I'm not complaining, that's the time it takes to develop. But you can see we had 5 cities in III era and in HD era, we've had 2 cities. That's 2 cities. 2 cities that have all ready featured in this same series. Not even new cities. 

 

By principle, for me personally, not saying it's for everyone, I go for variety. If I'm ordering Chinese food, I'm going variety, lots of little things rather than lots of just one thing. That's the whole attraction of GTA for me. There's so many things to do within the game. San Andreas was the epitome of a great GTA due to it's amount of variety, namely 3 different cities. Lately, setting and city-wise with GTA, we're getting lots of the same thing. 

 

I'm not ruling out returning to old cities. I just think injecting the flair, the originality, the ballsiness of setting a game in a unique time and place or at the very least a new city is a sure way to differentiate the series from any other modern-day setting in one of the big 3 cities in the USA in stead of a generic modern consecutive modern-day GTA's. Variation and variety please. 

 

If it's a modern day Vice, great! I'll look forward to it but it also means that it's just a little predictable. I mean where's the surprise-element? 

  • Jabalous and The7thOne like this

Journey_95
  • Journey_95

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2012
  • Germany

#78

Posted 03 April 2017 - 08:47 PM Edited by Journey_95, 03 April 2017 - 08:51 PM.

Not yet, I still want Vice City & Las Venturas in HD (SF with LV would be fine but it cant carry its own game).

And unlike the 3D Era fans here I don't think the HD era has been a waste. LC and LS are completely different (and much better) from their 3D versions. Its like exploring a new city basically (and one that is more true the real one.

 

If there is one thing Rockstar always does well its the open world of their games, there is so much detail put into them. And the stories and characters are completely different as well, saying they are just rip offs from the 3D era is stupid.

 

Of course if they do LC or LS again in the next few years then I would get the rehash argument but they probably wont. 

 

Also am I glad Osho is gone, what a troll! He couldn't stop circlejerking over GTA V a year ago and now suddenly hates it again? lol

  • Mister Pink, MiamiViceCity, Official General and 2 others like this

Pierug
  • Pierug

    World conqueror

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2016
  • Romania

#79

Posted 04 April 2017 - 08:00 AM

I prefer to have USA cities than outside USA. Because GTA is all-american, but I'd like new cities, only one per game, but at least, big.


yomum21
  • yomum21

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2016
  • Malaysia

#80

Posted 04 April 2017 - 02:27 PM Edited by yomum21, 04 April 2017 - 02:43 PM.

I think that they should have 2 cities, one reused and one that hasn't been used before. I think that the not used city should be New Orleans as GTA is known for pop-culture and story.

However, if GTA would be only online(But R*, please don't do the mistakes of GTA being a MMO mostly, as the magic of GTA is story mode, not online), then I would say to do it in LS and Vice.
  • Mister Pink likes this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#81

Posted 05 April 2017 - 03:01 PM

@ MisterPink

 

Lol I've run out of arguments brother ha ha !! All I know is that I wanna see a HD, modern version of VC and South Florida. And if possible, a V expansion to LV (and SF too if necessary). Anything after that, I all for, even it's located in Mars.

  • Mister Pink likes this

Pierug
  • Pierug

    World conqueror

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2016
  • Romania

#82

Posted 05 April 2017 - 06:36 PM Edited by Pierug, 05 April 2017 - 06:37 PM.

@Official-General

gUYS F**K VICE CITY

now seriously, only because a game set in that city was gr9 it doesn't mean that whatever game set in that city is great. So f**k Vice city.

And we understood that you want VC, don't repeat it 150K times.


Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#83

Posted 05 April 2017 - 06:49 PM

@Official-General

gUYS F**K VICE CITY

now seriously, only because a game set in that city was gr9 it doesn't mean that whatever game set in that city is great. So f**k Vice city.

And we understood that you want VC, don't repeat it 150K times.

 

Thank you for advice, but I can't hear you.

  • Journey_95 and Roger Cheeto like this

Pierug
  • Pierug

    World conqueror

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2016
  • Romania

#84

Posted 05 April 2017 - 06:58 PM Edited by Pierug, 06 April 2017 - 12:27 PM.

.


Pierug
  • Pierug

    World conqueror

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2016
  • Romania

#85

Posted 06 April 2017 - 12:27 PM

 

@Official-General

gUYS F**K VICE CITY

now seriously, only because a game set in that city was gr9 it doesn't mean that whatever game set in that city is great. So f**k Vice city.

And we understood that you want VC, don't repeat it 150K times.

 

Thank you for advice, but I can't hear you.

 

''you'' was plural btw


Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Viewfinder

  • 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

#86

Posted 06 April 2017 - 11:08 PM Edited by Mister Pink, 06 April 2017 - 11:40 PM.

@ MisterPink

 

Lol I've run out of arguments brother ha ha !! All I know is that I wanna see a HD, modern version of VC and South Florida. And if possible, a V expansion to LV (and SF too if necessary). Anything after that, I all for, even it's located in Mars.

 

I don't expect a response every time man, especially when I'm writing essays as replies. I respect your opinion though very much. I think we both love GTA and if it's in Vice, I'll see you in Vice man. :)

 

@Journey: Yeah, it's not like I don't want to see LV or Vice in HD, I truly do. My crux of the argument is that GTA isn't only competing with itself in terms of setting but other games too and I'm just putting for the differences between 3D era GTA and HD. A new city eliminates the fatigue of seeing the same sights. 

 

Also, yes, the cities are improved but their counterparts before the HD remakes were impressive for the time. So while I enjoyed an improved city in HD it's what I come to expect. It's relative to it's time it's created, so in which case not a selling point but a pre-requisite for a returning city. :)

 

@yomum: For sure. that's a good idea. Maybe Vice with New Orleans although we've just had New Orleans with Mafia III but I'd be happy with 2 cities. Very very happy. :)

 

Just to further my point a bit more, visually with regards to the visual fatique or repeat gaming experiences.

 

This video compares Driver: Parallel Lines' maps. It was great game. Anyone in to open-world games playing and enjoying Driver is then going to New York again in IV only a year later. Seems familiar.. And it just so happens Driver Parallel Lines has few more things it does better than IV. The driving inspired GTA IV as well as the wanted system. The cut-scenes were better graphically and the game was set in 1978 and 2006. They also had car customization and vehicle recovery, kind of standard things people expect from videogames now. 

 

I enjoyed comparing Driver PL to GTA III because it was a huge improvement and very different game and it's 5 years later. But then Rockstar come out with IV only the following year. Driver PL was very fresh in my memory. So most of IV's excitement hinged on new engine and new generation but if you look at the video, it''s hardly a new gaming experience for us.. not saying it wasn't totally new but not new like Vice City was back in 2002 before anyone else set a game down there during the 80's. 

 

 

I guess I'm looking for that new GTA experience like the time GTA owned Miami in 2002 or San Andreas did in 2004. New cities, new territory. Happy to see HD versions of before visited places but I reckon it wont be as fresh as a new time and place.

 

Say Rockstar take us to San Fierro next, they would want to make San Fierro better thant Watch Dogs 2's San Franscisco in every way from it's pedestrians, unique sights, unique events etc. As a creative, I would consider Watch Dogs 2's version of the city competition and if I was creative director on the project I would pushing my team hard to make it original otherwise we're just getting repeat experiences, repeat visuals etc.


Tengerecki
  • Tengerecki

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2017
  • Hungary

#87

Posted 07 April 2017 - 05:14 PM

No. Vice City hasn't been reused. I'll get tired when Vice City will have been reused.

  • Official General likes this

Jabalous
  • Jabalous

    Villager

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • None

#88

Posted 09 April 2017 - 02:16 PM Edited by Jabalous, 09 April 2017 - 02:19 PM.

I would like to revisit a re-imagined Vice City setting, but not after the sun-soaked, beachy and palmy Los Santos. Time for a change in scenery and I think Chicago has a potential as it hasn't been used enough in games. I only remember roaming Chicago in Driver 2, and yes, I didn't touch Watch Dogs. 


Rytuklis
  • Rytuklis

    That sarcastic asshole you all have grown to love.

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2010
  • Lithuania

#89

Posted 15 April 2017 - 10:19 AM

I wanna see VC reused before they come up with a new one.
  • Official General, Light Syde Riandy and Pastry like this

KYX
  • KYX

    This is the best member title i could think of

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2017
  • Venezuela

#90

Posted 16 April 2017 - 12:23 AM

As much as i'd love to see a remade Vice City on the HD universe, since is the last of the original three cities to revisit on RAGE, i kinda agree with Mr Pink.

It would be great to visit a whole new setting for the first time not only in GTA, but also in sanbox games history. However i also agree that GTA is all about pop-culture parodies, and all GTA cities are parodies from Hollywood landmarks.

But there are more interesting cities in the US. What about Philadelphia or Washington DC? Tennessee?

Even Carcer City (Chicago), which is part of the GTA universe would make a good GTA game, i think.

Also, for people that like to keep it original and wouldn't like to step out the settings from the first GTA... What about going back to London? Yeah, i think the franchise should not use real places again, but you can change the name to, say, GTA Queen City or something like that. It could work...

Seriously, i wont be mad if the next GTA is based on Vice City, San Fierro or Las Venturas... But a new setting would be a very refreshing thing.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users