Carbine23 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 The only reason i was ever excited about GTAIV was because I livenear New York City myself. And they somewhat failed at capturing that experience (If you lived in the city or lived near it, you'd understand). Now people are saying that Vice City or San Andreas are going to be the next GTA's. I myself would be disappointed if they did that. I would still buy the game but i would wish if they did something else. I say that they should do San Andreas all over again if it was a choice between the two. If they were to make San Andreas, they could actually make it look like California/Nevada this time. GTA: San Andreas had country towns and such. There is countryside in the real outside city life but there's also beach towns, mini-cities, and suburb towns. And the addition of a San Diego would be pretty cool. Plus they should make it look like its supposed to like with Los Santos on the west side of the map, San Fierro in the north, and Las Venturas East of the map. But anyways, that's just if they had to choose between the two. I think a new city would be the right direction to go. I actually would like a European city if they had to choose because they basically covered all 3 city type of environments already in the U.S.A. I think London would be a good choice because of their views on Americans and they do have gangs there (although all i heard they have was Knife crimes). But you don't just have to do a city. You can do the surrounding countryside with farms and crap. You can do cocky preppy suburban towns with high schoolers doing their average teenage crap (yes i know that would cause controversy haha). And if they ever had the power one day, Rockstar could make multiple cities. You can fly from London to Paris to Berlin to Rome to Amsterdam to Warsaw to Moscow (perfect for a crime based city) to Budapest to Madrid...to anywhere! Also Asia's not a terrible choice but i would rather keep it in the European area. And the transportation would be greater. You can have boats to transport you across channels, rivers, lakes, and seas. You have the city metro stations, plus i think there's a European train system that goes to different countries and cities. You have planes to go to different cities. You have cars of course, and maybe you can hitchhike just like they did in the movie Eurotrip. You have motorbikes and bicycles and of course Double-Decker buses. I say its a good idea. And if they couldn't do a whole continent, I say make 3 European cities at least. Although that would be tough to Include London because its across the English Channel. I think London, Paris and Amsterdam are the best choices if you needed to fit that amount in a map. Plus you have maybe 10 - 20 suburb towns, 10 historic towns, and 10 - 20 farm communities etc. And in past GTA's you had to find like secret packages, pigeons, horseshoes, clam shells etc. Maybe in this game, you can find historical objects like in the forests or unknown monuments. Europe is a place of history and mystery. You can find stuff like swords, jewels, golden cups, diamonds, crowns, and other crap that is worth nothing because it would be so expensive (like the holy grail). So thats my post. I hope some people agree with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnia sunt Communia Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I prefer it when Rockstar sticks to one city per-game, it allows them to better capture the feel of that city. That's why I didn't like Alderney in GTA IV. It did not feel like a separate city, it just felt like another Liberty City borough. I would like to see an "European Trilogy" as opposed to squashing all of Europe into one game. Maybe they could do London, Paris and Budapest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chngdman Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Alderny/Jersey has been part of Liberty since GTA 1, it was called Guernsey instead of Jersey It'd be awesome to see this engine used in titles that take place out of the US, that'd be sweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnia sunt Communia Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Alderny/Jersey has been part of Liberty since GTA 1, it was called Guernsey instead of Jersey What does that have to do with anything? I was simply stating that I prefer it when Rockstar concentrate on a single city. You're just trying to cause arguements again, do you seriously have nothing better to do with your life other than start arguements on a GTA forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chngdman Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I'm not trying to start an argument with you, but there is no Liberty without the part from Jersey, at least not yet? (Chinatown Wars will not use Alderney) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnia sunt Communia Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I'm not trying to start an argument with you, but there is no Liberty without the part from Jersey, at least not yet? (Chinatown Wars will not use Alderney) Again, I'm not saying there was. I simply stated that I prefer it when Rockstar only focuses on one city. Not that hard to understand, is it? Oh, and you were the one who was saying Liberty City (IV) is a remake of Liberty City (III), right? Well Liberty City (III) didn't include a Jersey parody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chngdman Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Yes, it did, what do you think Shoreside Vale was? It's called going shoreside when we go to the Jersey Shore... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnia sunt Communia Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Staten Island, as well as some areas of Long Island and The Bronx. There's some minor elements of the New Jersey suburbs in there; but no a full blown parody like Guernsey or Alderney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chngdman Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Well, nothing in GTA 1 was really close to reality, was it? Only names... other than that you might as well be driving around in the turtle-van in the second chapter of ninja turtles NES hehe it was all a bunch of repeated boxes. Shoreside was not Staten, either. Staunton, do you see the connection there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omnia sunt Communia Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Staunton was based on parts of Staten Island, thus the name. But it was mostly based on the commercial district of Manhattan as well as areas of Queens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chngdman Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 (edited) But, you just said (before I corrected you and you now agree) Shoreside was Staten. Don't edit it Oh boy, time turns tables, it does... Yes, it did, what do you think Shoreside Vale was? It's called going shoreside when we go to the Jersey Shore... Staten Island, as well as some areas of Long Island and The Bronx. There's some minor elements of the New Jersey suburbs in there; but no a full blown parody like Guernsey or Alderney. Shoreside was not Staten, either. Staunton, do you see the connection there? Staunton was based on parts of Staten Island, thus the name. But it was mostly based on the commercial district of Manhattan as well as areas of Queens. lol Edited January 17, 2009 by chngdman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
93Sean93 Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 I always thought Shoreside was supposed to be Staten since i've heard stuff about there being nothing interesting in Staten Island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now