Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Did Rockstar create the San Andreas state to its full potential?

42 replies to this topic
BlueRoseGirl_xx
  • BlueRoseGirl_xx

    BlueRoseGirl_xx

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2014
  • New-Zealand

#31

Posted 2 weeks ago

No, absolutely not! A DLC including two additional games/islands (San Fierro and Las Venturas) would be the cherry to the cake. They're not doing the full potential of a lot but hey..... patience and we will see what will happen next with GTA V + online + the next game in the sequence.....

snickers4passwords
  • snickers4passwords

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 2 weeks ago
  • United-States

#32

Posted 2 weeks ago

Los Santos should have definitely been more detailed and bigger. But I really enjoyed the surrounding area like the Alamo Sea and Blaine County. It is really a give and take situation, because the devs couldn't have spent all their time on one.  


Sleepwalking
  • Sleepwalking

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2017
  • None

#33

Posted 2 weeks ago

They did a great job, don't forget this is a PS3 / Xbox360 game.

 

Everyone was amazed when this game first came out.

  • PeterParkerHUMANSPIDER likes this

Hussein Sonic
  • Hussein Sonic

    Snake, what happened? SNAKE!? SNAAAAAAAAAAAKE!

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2018
  • Egypt

#34

Posted 2 weeks ago Edited by Hussein Sonic, 13 hours ago.

No, absolutely not! A DLC including two additional games/islands (San Fierro and Las Venturas) would be the cherry to the cake. They're not doing the full potential of a lot but hey..... patience and we will see what will happen next with GTA V + online + the next game in the sequence.....

Shut up and f*ck off! Please don't take this as an threat, but you just sound like a threat.

 

They're not going to make San Fierro and Las Venturas DLC for GTA V so close. They're still doing the full potential that the map in GTA V goes all of San Andreas. Sorta like California's map. You're clearly threatening the topic, flaming isn't allowed. Just warning you, so you don't get in trouble with San Fierro and Las Venturas.

 

Enough with this unjust bullsh*t. :angry:


ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#35

Posted 2 weeks ago

This thread is comprised of a very loaded question. First off, almost NOTHING is developed to its full potential since there is always room for improvement. Second, the more important (non hair-splitting) point I am making is that this question has two parts. The first is a statement about GTA V as a released game when it was launched and the second is all the effort that went into Online that was a much more lucrative, and dare say, path of least resistance. As a launch game, V is completely satisfying, improves the narrative, graphics, and gameplay immeasurably. But when Rockstar saw what a cash cow online was, all meaningful SP support came to a screeching halt. So if one wants to argue that San Andreas in V missed a lot of post-update potential, I would completely agree, since I care nothing for GTA Online. But as a full, complete, whole game, V is remarkable and one of the best in the series.


Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#36

Posted A day ago

This thread is comprised of a very loaded question. First off, almost NOTHING is developed to its full potential since there is always room for improvement. Second, the more important (non hair-splitting) point I am making is that this question has two parts. The first is a statement about GTA V as a released game when it was launched and the second is all the effort that went into Online that was a much more lucrative, and dare say, path of least resistance. As a launch game, V is completely satisfying, improves the narrative, graphics, and gameplay immeasurably. But when Rockstar saw what a cash cow online was, all meaningful SP support came to a screeching halt. So if one wants to argue that San Andreas in V missed a lot of post-update potential, I would completely agree, since I care nothing for GTA Online. But as a full, complete, whole game, V is remarkable and one of the best in the series.

 

Nice theory, but....

 

To me, V's map still did not make use of its full potential and it is still a colossal waste. No clever-sounding, intellect-laced counterargument will change that. 


John Smith
  • John Smith

    Cynical Prick

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 06 Jun 2012
  • None

#37

Posted A day ago

I remember discussing this back before V's release while we were all still speculating. I'm no expert in game development, so I don't know how possible this would've been, but I always would've liked infinite woods to the north of the map and infinite desert to the east. Nothing fancy or incredibly detailed, just something to give the world a more vast feel.

Hussein Sonic
  • Hussein Sonic

    Snake, what happened? SNAKE!? SNAAAAAAAAAAAKE!

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2018
  • Egypt

#38

Posted 18 hours ago

 

This thread is comprised of a very loaded question. First off, almost NOTHING is developed to its full potential since there is always room for improvement. Second, the more important (non hair-splitting) point I am making is that this question has two parts. The first is a statement about GTA V as a released game when it was launched and the second is all the effort that went into Online that was a much more lucrative, and dare say, path of least resistance. As a launch game, V is completely satisfying, improves the narrative, graphics, and gameplay immeasurably. But when Rockstar saw what a cash cow online was, all meaningful SP support came to a screeching halt. So if one wants to argue that San Andreas in V missed a lot of post-update potential, I would completely agree, since I care nothing for GTA Online. But as a full, complete, whole game, V is remarkable and one of the best in the series.

 

Nice theory, but....

 

To me, V's map still did not make use of its full potential and it is still a colossal waste. No clever-sounding, intellect-laced counterargument will change that. 

 

Don't make assumptions. No clever-sounding, intellect-laced counterargument won't change that.


Zello
  • Zello

    Hired gun

  • Victim of The Pit™
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2013
  • United-States
  • Meaningless Award

#39

Posted 18 hours ago

They needed Inland Empire and Orange county
  • Hussein Sonic likes this

AlexanderPierce
  • AlexanderPierce

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 2 weeks ago
  • Norfolk-Island

#40

Posted 17 hours ago

GTA V had a lot of potential which C* wasted on online.

  • Light Syde Riandy likes this

Hussein Sonic
  • Hussein Sonic

    Snake, what happened? SNAKE!? SNAAAAAAAAAAAKE!

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2018
  • Egypt

#41

Posted 17 hours ago

They needed Inland Empire and Orange county

I'll include Inland Empire and Orange County.


ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    GTA V = The Anti-Snore (IV) AKA The Snore Killer!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#42

Posted 15 hours ago

 

This thread is comprised of a very loaded question. First off, almost NOTHING is developed to its full potential since there is always room for improvement. Second, the more important (non hair-splitting) point I am making is that this question has two parts. The first is a statement about GTA V as a released game when it was launched and the second is all the effort that went into Online that was a much more lucrative, and dare say, path of least resistance. As a launch game, V is completely satisfying, improves the narrative, graphics, and gameplay immeasurably. But when Rockstar saw what a cash cow online was, all meaningful SP support came to a screeching halt. So if one wants to argue that San Andreas in V missed a lot of post-update potential, I would completely agree, since I care nothing for GTA Online. But as a full, complete, whole game, V is remarkable and one of the best in the series.

 

Nice theory, but....

 

To me, V's map still did not make use of its full potential and it is still a colossal waste. No clever-sounding, intellect-laced counterargument will change that. 

 

 

 

To me, it isn't.

 

I think that there are two underlying themes here, though. The first is the pure launch of the game, what we can call the "Day 1 version" meaning no DLC, no Online which was delayed, I think, and was a complete game we all pre ordered and picked up from Gamestop, Amazon, digital download, or wherever we bought it from. That version is complete, makes excellent use of an awesome, incredible map, is a world that even four years later, I still LOVE to play in and explore, and is utilized fantastically.

 

BUT, since we are now 4 and a half years after the launch of the game, and the SP has only gotten the most trivial, perfunctory content, and all effort and work has gone online, then THAT I can agree with makes the game feel incomplete to me. But, as I said, this is two different discussions. I would agree with your position on the latter, and we obviously completely disagree about the former.

 

So be it.


CryptReaperDorian
  • CryptReaperDorian

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Aug 2007
  • United-States

#43

Posted 10 hours ago

I think it's fine if R* wants to focus on other parts of San Andreas state in future releases, but GTA V's map still doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There's this entire interstate system that's absolutely bustling with traffic, but all it does is go from Los Santos, through two small rural towns, and then back into Los Santos. What R* created resembles something more along the lines of what a devoted fan thought up. It's full detail, and that's not deniable, but it lacks a proper layout to give the player a suspension of disbelief.

 

Keeping the exact same amount of (flat) land area GTA V currently has, R* could have replaced much of northern Blaine County with another city roughly the size of Los Santos, and then we'd still have a satisfying amount of countryside to explore. This may not have been feasible due to RAM limitations of the PS3 and Xbox 360, though.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users