Ken Rosenberg?

[TACOHAWK!]

Supposably in GTA IV there will be no more returning characters. But if you notice in the new trailer the bald guy wearing no shirt who says "Bling, check. Bottles, check. Paper,check." Sounds alot like Ken Rosenberg's voice right? Does this also mean Donald Love's voice will be back?

http://media.gtanet.com/images/3819_gta_iv.jpg

 

I actually think this guy more ken rosenburg like; balding hair, ugly glasses, easily scared by gunshots and killing. goofy suit and voice

i think this guy suits the portfolio of him

I thought that, too. Looks exactly like Ken, only that he's losing hair and looks older, but that's explainable.

I doubt that it's Ken, though, his voice is waaay off.

[sabbathfan]

I was just about to post a topic like this, but was surprised that someone else noticed the similar voice. For reference, compare

. Also (although I'm reaching here), notice his tattoo in the trailer saying "Mommy"... the crossed "M" looked like it could have been a "t" at one time.

Oh my goodness that is a stretch.

 

And it sounds NOTHING like William Fitchner! NOTHING!

 

Why is this topic still open?

[Mathew 47]

I thuoght R* specificaly said that there will be no returning characters.

[TACOHAWK!]

I thuoght R* specificaly said that there will be no returning characters.

They also said that their's a big secret hidden in the woods.

[i.v]

I thuoght R* specificaly said that there will be no returning characters.

They also said that their's a big secret hidden in the woods.

big foot

[Ash_735]

AND once again people are idiots are forget that this is a reboot, I bet you dumb f*cks also think this is the same Liberty City as GTA3/LCS too. Don't worry, when the game comes out you can all sit there looking like retarded dogs wondering why everything has changed and no characters are back whilst the rest of us smart people enjoy the start of the new GTA era.

[Gabe Logan]

They also said that their's a big secret hidden in the woods.

Really???

 

BIG FOOT IT IS! But there wouldnt be any major forests in Liberty?

[bigmitchbaker]

Jesus not another one of these threads..no since when was Ken look like that?

And Diaz doesn't look like that guy who said 'Get out' 'or ill kill you' Either...

 

 

Maybe the voice 'kinda' sounds the same no need to get all hyped up over it

there idiots

[willgtavcs]

one them guys sounds like Ricardo Diaz! dont you think?

The guy who says "Get Out, or I'll kill you" not only sounds like Ricardo Diaz. He looks like him, although a little slimmer.

mo the guy who says MINE IS RIGHT sounds like him

[voteneg]

 

AND once again people are idiots are forget that this is a reboot, I bet you dumb f*cks also think this is the same Liberty City as GTA3/LCS too. Don't worry, when the game comes out you can all sit there looking like retarded dogs wondering why everything has changed and no characters are back whilst the rest of us smart people enjoy the start of the new GTA era.

 

By Ash_375

 

You sir are a pompous jackass. Your post is the epitome of close mindedness, shoddy reading, misquoting, unneeded offensiveness, and all around asshatery. If you really have such strong feelings about something, perhaps you could write an essay or at least back up your points of contest with some sort of reasoning. But resorting to calling people retarded dogs and dumb f*cks is truly uncalled for, immature, and a sure sign of a person with a weak mind. It’s been said that using profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully, and although I might not agree with that statement wholeheartedly, it definitely appears to bear true in your case.

 

Moving on I’d like to take some time to write a brief essay (long post) on why I think you and quite a fair amount of other posters are incorrect. Ultimately what I say here won’t make me right, nor is it supposed to be the definitive end all answer to this question. Rather I hope it fosters a healthy, mature, and respectful debate. I’ve come to find that too many posters in these forums simply say what they think (often times in an offensive tone) without expounding upon the details or the reasoning behind their train of thought. All too many threads turn into a shouting match between a few ideologies that go back & forth saying the equivalent of five year olds yelling “no I’m right.” “nah uh, you’re wrong, I’m right.” etc etc LOCK. I think it’s time we all start reading through the threads in their entirety before posting, and if we all were to say something constructive that adds to the debate than maybe the process would be much more bearable.

 

Without further adieu I present my side of the “GTA IV new universe or not?” debate.

 

This essay will attempt to prove that Grand Theft Auto IV is not necessarily set in a new universe. The common perception is that because Rockstar Games redesigned the map of Liberty City, and that Dan Houser was quoted as saying “Virtually none” of the returning characters would be returning, that the game must not be tied to the previous installments. Rather you’ll find that the dissection of Rockstar’s own words, the need for strategic marketing strategy, the advanced capability of today's consoles, and in-game evidence as shown in trailers and screenshots will debunk the prevailing theories and spell out a clear reason as to why Grand Theft Auto IV is part of the GTA universe as we know it today.

 

Contention One. As said by Dan Houser and reported by The Official Playstation magazine and seen on GTA4.net (http://www.gta4.net/news/3865/grand-theft-auto-iv-preview-in-official-playstation-magazine/) “virtually none” of the characters in past games will be returning. Let’s define what virtually means.

 

vir•tu•al•ly - Show Spelled Pronunciation [vur-choo-uh-lee] –adverb

-Almost but not quite; nearly: "Virtually everyone gets a headache now and then" (People).

-For the most part, almost wholly; just about. “He is virtually unknown.”

 

Also there are a variety of ways to interpret characters and returning. A character could be a radio personality, the protagonist, the antagonist, or anyone in between. And returning doesn’t have to be an interactive character you take missions from, they could be seen in a cut scene, or merely heard over a telephone. Clearly we have a wide flux in determining what/who will be in the game, given the non-descript details that have been provided thus far. But for all intents and purposes we can interpret “virtually no returning characters” as very few characters of unknown significance will make some sort of appearance in GTA IV. This is significant because it affirms the fact that the Liberty City of GTA IV is in the same universe as past installments. After all how could any character return (make an appearance/come back) to Liberty City if this is set in a completely different universe? They simply wouldn’t exist otherwise.

 

Contention Two. What if Dan Houser didn’t intend to say virtually? Wouldn’t that clear up this whole issue? Yes it would, however it’s highly unlikely that Rockstar would say anything to the press that wasn’t canned, and especially the Housers. Its part of a strategic marketing strategy that is purposefully crafted to put across a specific message. In this case it seems to say that it’s a departure, that this game won’t be centered around the Leone crime family like past games in Liberty City have. No more running errands as Salvatore’s bitch boy. And to many GTA fans that’s a breath of fresh air. It however doesn’t mean that they do not exist or that they aren’t in Liberty City, it just means that the player doesn’t deal with them directly or even at all. Also the statement “virtually no returning characters” makes a big change in the perception of the game pre-launch. The statement is like a lynchpin, had it not been said most players would have likely assumed that game like previous games set in Liberty City would largely deal with the Leone or Forelli family… the same old stuff so to say. But with it you bring in a whole new aspect of uncertainty and mystery, who will be in it, who will I fight? That sort of speculation creates the sort of discussion (free advertising/hype) that we are having right now, it also creates a need to know, thus a high demand and therefore higher and immediate sales once the game is launched. As you can see that simple little phrase makes a big impact, and because of that you can be sure that it was intended to be said exactly that way.

 

Contention Three. Many people point out the fact that because Liberty City is remapped in Grand Theft Auto IV that it couldn’t be the same Liberty city as games past. And indeed they are correct; the Liberty City in four doesn’t share the same map nor the same road layout or the same geographical features. But that doesn’t make it a different fictional place. Rockstar is trying to do what they couldn’t do justice for on the last generation consoles because of technical limitations. With greater possibilities comes a greater ability to make a more realistic and lifelike city, and why wouldn’t Rockstar try to do so? Why is it though that they have to be confined to exact replicas of past maps in order to continue their well crafted story or fictional universe? It would seem that the jump to a new generation of consoles would warrant the concession that yes indeed it would be impossible to remodel an entire city in the span of 7-8 years from GTA III (2000) to GTA IV (2007/8.) That’s the simple price the player pays for having a larger and better detailed Liberty City to run amuck in.

 

Contention Four. The argument of a remapped Liberty City would be stronger if there wasn’t direct ties with this one as in games past. In the trailers and screenshots we see advertisements for familiar brands like Sprunk, Burgershot, Cluckin’ Bell, Logger Beer, and MeTV. We also have familiar car brands and names, cars like the Stallion, Comet, among likely many more. Simply put, if this Liberty City wasn’t in the same universe as past games than those brands wouldn’t exist in Grand Theft Auto IV. The new map is nothing more than the product of expanded ability. Direct tie-ins assure us that this is the same Liberty City.

 

In conclusion contentions one through four thoroughly provides strong reasoning as to why the Liberty City of GTA IV is the same fictional city in the GTA canon. The return of any character and the return of brands in the past games prove that this Liberty City does indeed have relation to previous installments and therefore is not in a whole new universe.

 

In relation to the original topic.

Diaz=dead in the 1980’s. He was killed in GTA Vice City.

Rosenberg should appear older than the bald guy seeing as he was in his thirties when VC took place.

It hasn’t been confirmed that Tommy Vercetti is dead. We know he was alive as of the time San Andreas took place. He was also around 35 in 1986 when Vice City took place, that means he should be about 57 years old in 2008.

I don’t expect any returning character to play a big role, I’d just like to figure out what’s going on with them. Perhaps news headlines or a conversation about them would suffice.

 

Last thoughts... The simple lack of returning characters in the game (if it is true there isn't) would not prove that this Liberty City isn't in the same universe as the older GTA games. Rather it only proves we don't deal with them. However the current common items like brands prove that there is some relation, therefore the same universe.

 

Thanks to all who took the time to read through. I know it was a monster post.

 

Not too shabby for a "dumb teenage American Midwesterner" if I do say so myself.

Edited December 9, 2007 by voteneg

[0_Lostboy_0]

Rosenberg should appear older

Good point. Although it's possible he just is a young looking 50+ year old, it's very unlikely; especially with all the coke he's done. I retract my guessing that it's Ken.

 

Also Liberty City in GTA1 and GTA3 were completely different, but it's still considered the same universe.

[voteneg]

I havent really played that GTA games for the original Playstation or PC so I'm not familiar with the set up map wise in those games. But I know the general story plot by reading about it. So thanks for the affirmation.

[0_Lostboy_0]

 

 

[Ash_735]

Ok, now in return to that nice big post on the previous page I can back myself up (thanks for insulting me by the way, shame I know what I'm talking about). Anyway, as long time GTA players will know, there was a Liberty City, Vice City and a San Andreas in GTA1, now these were not the same as the ones that appeared in the GTA3 era, includes map changes, street names, overall look of the cities and one little thing they also changed was wiping out any previous characters mentioned since they rebooted in the GTA3 era. Now most of you gullable chaps might be thinking "How can you prove that" well, play the games for one, you'll see right away the city has a much different lay out and that any character mentioned never appears in the GTA3 ers story. The Mob bosses and Bubba who ruled Liberty City in GTA1 don't even get a mention in GTA3. Now with this quite obvious reboot, it's plain to see this has happened again with GTA IV, some of you might be thinking again "Well why can't Tommy or CJ return?", well, if you paid attention to the story, you'll notice that Rockstar always linked characters to Liberty City, they have had something to do with Liberty CVity and most likely been there at one point, now in GTA IV since the GTA3 Liberty City doesn't exist, then neither can the events that are connected to them, so that rules out all characters who appeared in Vice City AND San Andreas.

 

Now another clear reason that GTAIV is a reboot once again is the fact that Liberty City has changed and evolved once again, don't go expecting people to be talking about Sal or Claude, they don't exist in this era. The most us players will get is a slight refernce like grafitti or a billboard. Now, Houser said Virtually, that confirms one thing, the Radio Personalitys, if you bother to do research you'll see that Radio Lazlow is again working on the games audio production, along with Lazlow returning to Radio, also expect Reed Tucker, O&A, Big Wayne, Couzin Ed and Frank Chavez.

 

The only exception to this is El Burro from GTA1, but in GTA1 he was living in the CITY of SAN ANDREAS. In GTA3 he has a different Voice Actor and we never actually see him during gameplay and he isn't considered a major character. If his modified GTA1 artwork didn't appear on the cover most people wouldn't of connected the two.

 

So, once again, I'll say this, Grand Theft Auto IV is a reboot of the series just like Grand Theft Auto III was. The slate has been cleared, all past stories don't exist in this timeline and they have started again. Downside is, your fave characters from the GTA3 era will not be making an appearence in this game. This is highly due to CONTINUITY reasons, it would NOT make sense for characters from Vice City or San Andreas to appear in Liberty City during the GTA4 era.

 

The hardest thing people here seem to grasp is that this is a reboot and that no characters will be coming. It's hard for people to let go of these characters and they are easily fooling themselves if they think they will return in a later GTA game.

 

Rockstar has ended the GTA3 story, ironically with the first game andstarting it with the last. We won't know what has happened to Tommy. We won't know who Claude shot. We won't find out what happened to Donald Love. Annoying I know, but at least we get a completely new fresh story with new characters who are meant to be more realistic in a more realistic enviroment.

 

Now, people won't read this, they'll continue to think that We'll get mission from Tommy in GTA4 and just be annoying as always. I've explained this many times before.

[Ash_735]

Also Liberty City in GTA1 and GTA3 were completely different, but it's still considered the same universe.

NO THEY ARE NOT!

[Ronnyboy]

I just read it, and your right. Everytime there is a new system, they make a whole new story line. But I hope to see some easter eggs of past GTA's

[badjab]

wow, voteneg and ash both have very convincing arguments, i want to believe voteneg, but it is very possible that what ash said is true.

[voteneg]

To Ash_375

 

 

(thanks for insulting me by the way, shame I know what I'm talking about).

Great! I'm sure you do, really I do. But that still doesn't mean you have any sense of decorum.

 

Now the location of GTA2 was never officially specified but many believe it to be NYC/Liberty City based on the opening movie. The main character was Claude Speed. We also know the main character in GTAIII was named Claude as well. So I'd say it’s not that big of a stretch to suggest that we played in Liberty City (future) in GTA2, and that we played him as a character that made it to a new platform as a protagonist nonetheless in GTA III. Many people think Claude Speed in GTA2 is Claude in GTAIII. If that is in fact true (only Rockstar knows) than that would prove that the GTA series can change the city design up or change cities from platform to platform without leaving the same universe. Therefore debunking your point.

 

If the state of San Andreas was part of the same physical earth as Vice City & Liberty City(III) and we have remnants from San Andreas like Burgershot, Cluckin Bell, Logger Beer and others in GTAIV than that would seem to indicate that this new game is still in the same universe as the others, and therefore the same city. Even if you were correct (which is debatable) in saying that GTA 1 & 2 had nothing to do with the universe III was set in that hardly establishes a pattern. One reboot proves they did it once not that they'll do it again. Perhaps if it’s happened three or more times than I'd say a pattern was evident... but it isn’t.

 

I am well aware that some radio guys like Lazlow will be returning, and I think that’s awesome. But Dan Houser said there would be returning characters (albeit virtually none) but still one or two in my guestimate. What needs to be understood is that even if we have familiar voice actors lending their voice to the game that doesn’t make them the same character. So you have to admit to at least one of these statements...

 

1. The returning actors voicing the radio personalities are not playing the same character in past games and therefore must mean that it’s some other unknown character returning that you cant account for.

2. That they are voicing the same personalities that we know and love from the GTAIII series therefore proving it to be in the same universe.

3. Dan Houser must have meant to say "no returning characters" instead of "virtually no returning characters" despite its unlikelihood.

4. Or that Rockstar is just ignoring all the rules of continuity. And not giving a flying F about literary procedure.

 

Take your pick.

 

In short the connection between GTA 1 & 2 to III and beyond is debatable and its existence hasn’t been disproven. Even if it was disproven that would not establish a pattern of reboot as you describe. From what I understand everything changed from GTA 2 to III. The car names, people everything… if this true than why didn’t Rockstar do a proper reboot this time around and create fresh car names and fictional businesses? The evidence already shown like the familiar brands seem to indicate that this Liberty City is in the same universe as the III series. And even if there isn’t any returning characters that doesn’t prove that it’s a whole new city, rather it just proves that we don’t interact with them. And finally the redesign of the city can be attributed to advancements in technology.

Edited December 10, 2007 by voteneg

[YourNeighborhoodKiller]

Supposably in GTA IV there will be no more returning characters. But if you notice in the new trailer the bald guy wearing no shirt who says "Bling, check. Bottles, check. Paper,check." Sounds alot like Ken Rosenberg's voice right? Does this also mean Donald Love's voice will be back?

 

I actually think this guy more ken rosenburg like; balding hair, ugly glasses, easily scared by gunshots and killing. goofy suit and voice

i think this guy suits the portfolio of him

That guy behind him, (not Roman) looks a lot like Tony Cipriani from GTAIII.

 

 

 

[voteneg]

 

Supposably in GTA IV there will be no more returning characters. But if you notice in the new trailer the bald guy wearing no shirt who says "Bling, check. Bottles, check. Paper,check." Sounds alot like Ken Rosenberg's voice right? Does this also mean Donald Love's voice will be back?

 

 

I actually think this guy more ken rosenburg like; balding hair, ugly glasses, easily scared by gunshots and killing. goofy suit and voice

i think this guy suits the portfolio of him

That guy behind him, (not Roman) looks a lot like Tony Cipriani from GTAIII.

 

That's Roman tied up in the chair. Watch the video and you'll see that he's sitting right in front of Niko in that chair.

The man with the tie that slaps Niko is just standing between the two. And the other guy standing has an eastern european

accent. Mr. Cipriani doesnt have that.

Edited December 10, 2007 by voteneg

[0_Lostboy_0]

 

Also Liberty City in GTA1 and GTA3 were completely different, but it's still considered the same universe.

NO THEY ARE NOT!

Ok, there's no hard proof that GTA1 is connected to GTA3. But there's no hard proof that it's not. Looking at it that way, there's no real hard proof to link any of the GTA games. Only characters, names, products, radio stations, and other small hints. Although I thought this would be proof enough. I thought it would just be assumed to all be the same universe, unless it was specifically said otherwise, which it never has. The only proof against it, is changing maps. Although, that's just a game evolution thing; I thought to be looked past.

 

I can't find any hard proof, but how about this; in the Liberty Tree for GTA3, for February 2001 it reference GTA1 "Liberty City has been plagued in recent months by a spate of car jacking, the worst in the greater Liberty City area since 1997" (the time of GTA1).

 

I'm thinking that there weren't many characters that carried over from GTA1 to GTA3 because no one really cared about the GTA1 characters. It wasn't until GTA3, that the game had a more developed story and characters. I'm curious where many characters are now, however I don't care if I see any of them in GTA4. Because it's being re-booted; it's a new fresh start. I like that. But it doesn't mean that those characters don't exist somewhere in this universe, even if they're never mentioned in GTA4.

Edited December 10, 2007 by 0_Lostboy_0

[bigmitchbaker]

the old one looks better

[rugbyrules]

richardo diaz died in 1986 in vice city, this game is set in 2007 i dought he will be in this game lol, unless its his cousin or some sh*t i dought that though. btw the guy looks more like ken rosenburg....

[DigitallyInsane]

You sir are a pompous jackass. Your post is the epitome of close mindedness, shoddy reading, misquoting, unneeded offensiveness, and all around asshatery. If you really have such strong feelings about something, perhaps you could write an essay or at least back up your points of contest with some sort of reasoning. But resorting to calling people retarded dogs and dumb f*cks is truly uncalled for, immature, and a sure sign of a person with a weak mind. It’s been said that using profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully, and although I might not agree with that statement wholeheartedly, it definitely appears to bear true in your case.

 

Moving on I’d like to take some time to write a brief essay (long post) on why I think you and quite a fair amount of other posters are incorrect. Ultimately what I say here won’t make me right, nor is it supposed to be the definitive end all answer to this question. Rather I hope it fosters a healthy, mature, and respectful debate. I’ve come to find that too many posters in these forums simply say what they think (often times in an offensive tone) without expounding upon the details or the reasoning behind their train of thought. All too many threads turn into a shouting match between a few ideologies that go back & forth saying the equivalent of five year olds yelling “no I’m right.” “nah uh, you’re wrong, I’m right.” etc etc LOCK. I think it’s time we all start reading through the threads in their entirety before posting, and if we all were to say something constructive that adds to the debate than maybe the process would be much more bearable.

 

Without further adieu I present my side of the “GTA IV new universe or not?” debate.

 

This essay will attempt to prove that Grand Theft Auto IV is not necessarily set in a new universe. The common perception is that because Rockstar Games redesigned the map of Liberty City, and that Dan Houser was quoted as saying “Virtually none” of the returning characters would be returning, that the game must not be tied to the previous installments. Rather you’ll find that the dissection of Rockstar’s own words, the need for strategic marketing strategy, the advanced capability of today's consoles, and in-game evidence as shown in trailers and screenshots will debunk the prevailing theories and spell out a clear reason as to why Grand Theft Auto IV is part of the GTA universe as we know it today.

 

Contention One. As said by Dan Houser and reported by The Official Playstation magazine and seen on GTA4.net (http://www.gta4.net/news/3865/grand-theft-auto-iv-preview-in-official-playstation-magazine/) “virtually none” of the characters in past games will be returning. Let’s define what virtually means.

 

vir•tu•al•ly - Show Spelled Pronunciation [vur-choo-uh-lee] –adverb

-Almost but not quite; nearly: "Virtually everyone gets a headache now and then" (People).

-For the most part, almost wholly; just about. “He is virtually unknown.”

 

Also there are a variety of ways to interpret characters and returning. A character could be a radio personality, the protagonist, the antagonist, or anyone in between. And returning doesn’t have to be an interactive character you take missions from, they could be seen in a cut scene, or merely heard over a telephone. Clearly we have a wide flux in determining what/who will be in the game, given the non-descript details that have been provided thus far. But for all intents and purposes we can interpret “virtually no returning characters” as very few characters of unknown significance will make some sort of appearance in GTA IV. This is significant because it affirms the fact that the Liberty City of GTA IV is in the same universe as past installments. After all how could any character return (make an appearance/come back) to Liberty City if this is set in a completely different universe? They simply wouldn’t exist otherwise.

 

Contention Two. What if Dan Houser didn’t intend to say virtually? Wouldn’t that clear up this whole issue? Yes it would, however it’s highly unlikely that Rockstar would say anything to the press that wasn’t canned, and especially the Housers. Its part of a strategic marketing strategy that is purposefully crafted to put across a specific message. In this case it seems to say that it’s a departure, that this game won’t be centered around the Leone crime family like past games in Liberty City have. No more running errands as Salvatore’s bitch boy. And to many GTA fans that’s a breath of fresh air. It however doesn’t mean that they do not exist or that they aren’t in Liberty City, it just means that the player doesn’t deal with them directly or even at all. Also the statement “virtually no returning characters” makes a big change in the perception of the game pre-launch. The statement is like a lynchpin, had it not been said most players would have likely assumed that game like previous games set in Liberty City would largely deal with the Leone or Forelli family… the same old stuff so to say. But with it you bring in a whole new aspect of uncertainty and mystery, who will be in it, who will I fight? That sort of speculation creates the sort of discussion (free advertising/hype) that we are having right now, it also creates a need to know, thus a high demand and therefore higher and immediate sales once the game is launched. As you can see that simple little phrase makes a big impact, and because of that you can be sure that it was intended to be said exactly that way.

 

Contention Three. Many people point out the fact that because Liberty City is remapped in Grand Theft Auto IV that it couldn’t be the same Liberty city as games past. And indeed they are correct; the Liberty City in four doesn’t share the same map nor the same road layout or the same geographical features. But that doesn’t make it a different fictional place. Rockstar is trying to do what they couldn’t do justice for on the last generation consoles because of technical limitations. With greater possibilities comes a greater ability to make a more realistic and lifelike city, and why wouldn’t Rockstar try to do so? Why is it though that they have to be confined to exact replicas of past maps in order to continue their well crafted story or fictional universe? It would seem that the jump to a new generation of consoles would warrant the concession that yes indeed it would be impossible to remodel an entire city in the span of 7-8 years from GTA III (2000) to GTA IV (2007/8.) That’s the simple price the player pays for having a larger and better detailed Liberty City to run amuck in.

 

Contention Four. The argument of a remapped Liberty City would be stronger if there wasn’t direct ties with this one as in games past. In the trailers and screenshots we see advertisements for familiar brands like Sprunk, Burgershot, Cluckin’ Bell, Logger Beer, and MeTV. We also have familiar car brands and names, cars like the Stallion, Comet, among likely many more. Simply put, if this Liberty City wasn’t in the same universe as past games than those brands wouldn’t exist in Grand Theft Auto IV. The new map is nothing more than the product of expanded ability. Direct tie-ins assure us that this is the same Liberty City.

 

In conclusion contentions one through four thoroughly provides strong reasoning as to why the Liberty City of GTA IV is the same fictional city in the GTA canon. The return of any character and the return of brands in the past games prove that this Liberty City does indeed have relation to previous installments and therefore is not in a whole new universe.

 

In relation to the original topic.

Diaz=dead in the 1980’s. He was killed in GTA Vice City.

Rosenberg should appear older than the bald guy seeing as he was in his thirties when VC took place.

It hasn’t been confirmed that Tommy Vercetti is dead. We know he was alive as of the time San Andreas took place. He was also around 35 in 1986 when Vice City took place, that means he should be about 57 years old in 2008.

I don’t expect any returning character to play a big role, I’d just like to figure out what’s going on with them. Perhaps news headlines or a conversation about them would suffice.

 

Last thoughts... The simple lack of returning characters in the game (if it is true there isn't) would not prove that this Liberty City isn't in the same universe as the older GTA games. Rather it only proves we don't deal with them. However the current common items like brands prove that there is some relation, therefore the same universe.

 

Thanks to all who took the time to read through. I know it was a monster post.

 

Not too shabby for a "dumb teenage American Midwesterner" if I do say so myself.

Can I grill my whopper on that flame please?

 

kthxbai.

[Ash_735]

Just to add into this discussion again, I to believe that GTA2 is a future incarnation of Liberty City, it certainly is represented in GTA3 (3 Districts, Head Radio, etc). Claude Speed in GTA2 is only 29 years old and gets killed at the end of the game, now if we take the date of the game, 2013, that would mean he is 17 during 2001 (When GTA3 takes place) and 8 years old during 1992 (The events of San Andreas). I don't know about you, but Claude in GTA3 seems a little older than that! I will admit however R* have based Claude in GTA3 heavily on the GTA2 version. Another area being, Claude Speed is BRITISH, whilst the Claude from GTA3 doesn't really seem to be, he doesn't even talk.

 

Now, Brands, they have always been passed down the line in Reboots, the most remembered ones from GTA2 were mentioned in GTA3 but on a smaller scale. With the GTA3 era however, it was obvious spoof brands became more well knwon through the course of the games, by the end of the GTA3 era, R* pretty much had their own little spoof Market and commercial brands which would be perfect for a place like Time Square!

 

Cars and stuff were kept because like the brands, they are more well known. GTA1 London had spoof car name which were more realistic, and in early GTA3 days, the car names were much like GTA2. Once again, it's going with the keep what we've already got and just make it look prettier.

 

To me, for all the GTA games to make sense, they have to be in their own timeline, each being a reboot...

 

GTA1 era

- Grand Theft Auto (Liberty City, Head Radio, First Game)

- GTA London 1969

- GTA London 1961

 

GTA2 era

- GTA2 (Liberty City, aka Anywhere City, Head Radio revamped again, new engine, new story, 3 Districts introduced)

 

GTA3 era (here's where things get big and mainstream)

- Grand Theft Auto III (Rebooted Liberty City, Head Radio changed again, 3 Districts of the city)

- Grand Theft Auto: Vice City

- Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas

- Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories

- Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories

 

GTA4 era (Uh Oh, rebooting after becoming big)

- Grand Theft Auto IV (Liberty City returns, much much more realistic, 5 Districts, etc)

- Future GTA games on this engine?

[willy_825]

This Richardo Diez thing isn't possible, but that voice reminds me of the voice from the opening cutscene of GTA 3. Remember, senor Deekead. I think he's dead too though

[voteneg]

Just to add into this discussion again, I to believe that GTA2 is a future incarnation of Liberty City, it certainly is represented in GTA3 (3 Districts, Head Radio, etc). Claude Speed in GTA2 is only 29 years old and gets killed at the end of the game, now if we take the date of the game, 2013, that would mean he is 17 during 2001 (When GTA3 takes place) and 8 years old during 1992 (The events of San Andreas). I don't know about you, but Claude in GTA3 seems a little older than that! I will admit however R* have based Claude in GTA3 heavily on the GTA2 version. Another area being, Claude Speed is BRITISH, whilst the Claude from GTA3 doesn't really seem to be, he doesn't even talk.

 

Now, Brands, they have always been passed down the line in Reboots, the most remembered ones from GTA2 were mentioned in GTA3 but on a smaller scale. With the GTA3 era however, it was obvious spoof brands became more well knwon through the course of the games, by the end of the GTA3 era, R* pretty much had their own little spoof Market and commercial brands which would be perfect for a place like Time Square!

 

Cars and stuff were kept because like the brands, they are more well known. GTA1 London had spoof car name which were more realistic, and in early GTA3 days, the car names were much like GTA2. Once again, it's going with the keep what we've already got and just make it look prettier.

 

To me, for all the GTA games to make sense, they have to be in their own timeline, each being a reboot...

 

GTA1 era

- Grand Theft Auto (Liberty City, Head Radio, First Game)

- GTA London 1969

- GTA London 1961

 

GTA2 era

- GTA2 (Liberty City, aka Anywhere City, Head Radio revamped again, new engine, new story, 3 Districts introduced)

 

GTA3 era (here's where things get big and mainstream)

- Grand Theft Auto III (Rebooted Liberty City, Head Radio changed again, 3 Districts of the city)

- Grand Theft Auto: Vice City

- Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas

- Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories

- Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories

 

GTA4 era (Uh Oh, rebooting after becoming big)

- Grand Theft Auto IV (Liberty City returns, much much more realistic, 5 Districts, etc)

- Future GTA games on this engine?

Your right about the Claude deal then. It would it seem that Rockstar does have a restart as of the GTAIII series.

However I still stress that we will find old characters in the game according to Dan Housers quote. And that would indicate

the same universe. In short we will just have to wait to see what the game brings. But based on the evidence thus far, and Mr. Houser's

quote I still maintain that its the most logical conclusion based on the facts presented thus far.

 

In order for what you say to be true Rockstar has to be ignoring the rules of continuity, and that bothers more than anything.

[RandomLoser]

 

AND once again people are idiots are forget that this is a reboot, I bet you dumb f*cks also think this is the same Liberty City as GTA3/LCS too. Don't worry, when the game comes out you can all sit there looking like retarded dogs wondering why everything has changed and no characters are back whilst the rest of us smart people enjoy the start of the new GTA era.

 

By Ash_375

 

You sir are a pompous jackass. Your post is the epitome of close mindedness, shoddy reading, misquoting, unneeded offensiveness, and all around asshatery. If you really have such strong feelings about something, perhaps you could write an essay or at least back up your points of contest with some sort of reasoning. But resorting to calling people retarded dogs and dumb f*cks is truly uncalled for, immature, and a sure sign of a person with a weak mind. It’s been said that using profanity is the effort of a feeble mind to express itself forcefully, and although I might not agree with that statement wholeheartedly, it definitely appears to bear true in your case.

 

Moving on I’d like to take some time to write a brief essay (long post) on why I think you and quite a fair amount of other posters are incorrect. Ultimately what I say here won’t make me right, nor is it supposed to be the definitive end all answer to this question. Rather I hope it fosters a healthy, mature, and respectful debate. I’ve come to find that too many posters in these forums simply say what they think (often times in an offensive tone) without expounding upon the details or the reasoning behind their train of thought. All too many threads turn into a shouting match between a few ideologies that go back & forth saying the equivalent of five year olds yelling “no I’m right.” “nah uh, you’re wrong, I’m right.” etc etc LOCK. I think it’s time we all start reading through the threads in their entirety before posting, and if we all were to say something constructive that adds to the debate than maybe the process would be much more bearable.

 

Without further adieu I present my side of the “GTA IV new universe or not?” debate.

 

This essay will attempt to prove that Grand Theft Auto IV is not necessarily set in a new universe. The common perception is that because Rockstar Games redesigned the map of Liberty City, and that Dan Houser was quoted as saying “Virtually none” of the returning characters would be returning, that the game must not be tied to the previous installments. Rather you’ll find that the dissection of Rockstar’s own words, the need for strategic marketing strategy, the advanced capability of today's consoles, and in-game evidence as shown in trailers and screenshots will debunk the prevailing theories and spell out a clear reason as to why Grand Theft Auto IV is part of the GTA universe as we know it today.

 

Contention One. As said by Dan Houser and reported by The Official Playstation magazine and seen on GTA4.net (http://www.gta4.net/news/3865/grand-theft-auto-iv-preview-in-official-playstation-magazine/) “virtually none” of the characters in past games will be returning. Let’s define what virtually means.

 

vir•tu•al•ly - Show Spelled Pronunciation [vur-choo-uh-lee] –adverb

-Almost but not quite; nearly: "Virtually everyone gets a headache now and then" (People).

-For the most part, almost wholly; just about. “He is virtually unknown.”

 

Also there are a variety of ways to interpret characters and returning. A character could be a radio personality, the protagonist, the antagonist, or anyone in between. And returning doesn’t have to be an interactive character you take missions from, they could be seen in a cut scene, or merely heard over a telephone. Clearly we have a wide flux in determining what/who will be in the game, given the non-descript details that have been provided thus far. But for all intents and purposes we can interpret “virtually no returning characters” as very few characters of unknown significance will make some sort of appearance in GTA IV. This is significant because it affirms the fact that the Liberty City of GTA IV is in the same universe as past installments. After all how could any character return (make an appearance/come back) to Liberty City if this is set in a completely different universe? They simply wouldn’t exist otherwise.

 

Contention Two. What if Dan Houser didn’t intend to say virtually? Wouldn’t that clear up this whole issue? Yes it would, however it’s highly unlikely that Rockstar would say anything to the press that wasn’t canned, and especially the Housers. Its part of a strategic marketing strategy that is purposefully crafted to put across a specific message. In this case it seems to say that it’s a departure, that this game won’t be centered around the Leone crime family like past games in Liberty City have. No more running errands as Salvatore’s bitch boy. And to many GTA fans that’s a breath of fresh air. It however doesn’t mean that they do not exist or that they aren’t in Liberty City, it just means that the player doesn’t deal with them directly or even at all. Also the statement “virtually no returning characters” makes a big change in the perception of the game pre-launch. The statement is like a lynchpin, had it not been said most players would have likely assumed that game like previous games set in Liberty City would largely deal with the Leone or Forelli family… the same old stuff so to say. But with it you bring in a whole new aspect of uncertainty and mystery, who will be in it, who will I fight? That sort of speculation creates the sort of discussion (free advertising/hype) that we are having right now, it also creates a need to know, thus a high demand and therefore higher and immediate sales once the game is launched. As you can see that simple little phrase makes a big impact, and because of that you can be sure that it was intended to be said exactly that way.

 

Contention Three. Many people point out the fact that because Liberty City is remapped in Grand Theft Auto IV that it couldn’t be the same Liberty city as games past. And indeed they are correct; the Liberty City in four doesn’t share the same map nor the same road layout or the same geographical features. But that doesn’t make it a different fictional place. Rockstar is trying to do what they couldn’t do justice for on the last generation consoles because of technical limitations. With greater possibilities comes a greater ability to make a more realistic and lifelike city, and why wouldn’t Rockstar try to do so? Why is it though that they have to be confined to exact replicas of past maps in order to continue their well crafted story or fictional universe? It would seem that the jump to a new generation of consoles would warrant the concession that yes indeed it would be impossible to remodel an entire city in the span of 7-8 years from GTA III (2000) to GTA IV (2007/8.) That’s the simple price the player pays for having a larger and better detailed Liberty City to run amuck in.

 

Contention Four. The argument of a remapped Liberty City would be stronger if there wasn’t direct ties with this one as in games past. In the trailers and screenshots we see advertisements for familiar brands like Sprunk, Burgershot, Cluckin’ Bell, Logger Beer, and MeTV. We also have familiar car brands and names, cars like the Stallion, Comet, among likely many more. Simply put, if this Liberty City wasn’t in the same universe as past games than those brands wouldn’t exist in Grand Theft Auto IV. The new map is nothing more than the product of expanded ability. Direct tie-ins assure us that this is the same Liberty City.

 

In conclusion contentions one through four thoroughly provides strong reasoning as to why the Liberty City of GTA IV is the same fictional city in the GTA canon. The return of any character and the return of brands in the past games prove that this Liberty City does indeed have relation to previous installments and therefore is not in a whole new universe.

 

In relation to the original topic.

Diaz=dead in the 1980’s. He was killed in GTA Vice City.

Rosenberg should appear older than the bald guy seeing as he was in his thirties when VC took place.

It hasn’t been confirmed that Tommy Vercetti is dead. We know he was alive as of the time San Andreas took place. He was also around 35 in 1986 when Vice City took place, that means he should be about 57 years old in 2008.

I don’t expect any returning character to play a big role, I’d just like to figure out what’s going on with them. Perhaps news headlines or a conversation about them would suffice.

 

Last thoughts... The simple lack of returning characters in the game (if it is true there isn't) would not prove that this Liberty City isn't in the same universe as the older GTA games. Rather it only proves we don't deal with them. However the current common items like brands prove that there is some relation, therefore the same universe.

 

Thanks to all who took the time to read through. I know it was a monster post.

 

Not too shabby for a "dumb teenage American Midwesterner" if I do say so myself.

god damn. Can you say shot the f*ck down?

Edited December 10, 2007 by RandomLoser

[Southside Dukes Ballas]

To Ash_375

 

 

(thanks for insulting me by the way, shame I know what I'm talking about).

Great! I'm sure you do, really I do. But that still doesn't mean you have any sense of decorum.

 

Now the location of GTA2 was never officially specified but many believe it to be NYC/Liberty City based on the opening movie. The main character was Claude Speed. We also know the main character in GTAIII was named Claude as well. So I'd say it’s not that big of a stretch to suggest that we played in Liberty City (future) in GTA2, and that we played him as a character that made it to a new platform as a protagonist nonetheless in GTA III. Many people think Claude Speed in GTA2 is Claude in GTAIII. If that is in fact true (only Rockstar knows) than that would prove that the GTA series can change the city design up or change cities from platform to platform without leaving the same universe. Therefore debunking your point.

 

If the state of San Andreas was part of the same physical earth as Vice City & Liberty City(III) and we have remnants from San Andreas like Burgershot, Cluckin Bell, Logger Beer and others in GTAIV than that would seem to indicate that this new game is still in the same universe as the others, and therefore the same city. Even if you were correct (which is debatable) in saying that GTA 1 & 2 had nothing to do with the universe III was set in that hardly establishes a pattern. One reboot proves they did it once not that they'll do it again. Perhaps if it’s happened three or more times than I'd say a pattern was evident... but it isn’t.

 

I am well aware that some radio guys like Lazlow will be returning, and I think that’s awesome. But Dan Houser said there would be returning characters (albeit virtually none) but still one or two in my guestimate. What needs to be understood is that even if we have familiar voice actors lending their voice to the game that doesn’t make them the same character. So you have to admit to at least one of these statements...

 

1. The returning actors voicing the radio personalities are not playing the same character in past games and therefore must mean that it’s some other unknown character returning that you cant account for.

2. That they are voicing the same personalities that we know and love from the GTAIII series therefore proving it to be in the same universe.

3. Dan Houser must have meant to say "no returning characters" instead of "virtually no returning characters" despite its unlikelihood.

4. Or that Rockstar is just ignoring all the rules of continuity. And not giving a flying F about literary procedure.

 

Take your pick.

 

In short the connection between GTA 1 & 2 to III and beyond is debatable and its existence hasn’t been disproven. Even if it was disproven that would not establish a pattern of reboot as you describe. From what I understand everything changed from GTA 2 to III. The car names, people everything… if this true than why didn’t Rockstar do a proper reboot this time around and create fresh car names and fictional businesses? The evidence already shown like the familiar brands seem to indicate that this Liberty City is in the same universe as the III series. And even if there isn’t any returning characters that doesn’t prove that it’s a whole new city, rather it just proves that we don’t interact with them. And finally the redesign of the city can be attributed to advancements in technology.

Aftwer reading both arguments(and both were very good) I am siding with you.

 

Untill R* actuall says that every GTA is in a differnt universe then this may very well be continuation of the past GTAs. There are many possibilites on how they could all be connected. The license plates in 1 of the pics showed Liberty State and that is one possibility. Also if R* was setting this in a alternate universe then they wouldn't have said virtually no returning characters. They would've just said no returning characters. The truth is we won't actually know until this game comes out.

[Ash_735]

god damn. Can you say shot the f*ck down?

God Damn, Can you say Inability to read the rest of the thread?