Why it isn't a good idea for a new Vice City

[Jordy.]

Not every GTA player knows as much about the series as us. We know that if Rockstar would release a new Vice City, it'll be entirely different. But when normal people (yes, we're not normal) see the words 'Vice City' printed on the cover, they'll just think that it's a re-released version of the classic, therefore, not bother buying it. The same happened to Vice City Stories.

 

I want Rockstar to sell their games well, since they give us some grade A classics like GTA and Bully. They spend a lot of cash on them, so it would be a shame if they worked really hard on the new GTA VC only to find that the sales don't reach expectations.

 

That's the only reason I don't like the idea of having Vice City as the next GTA.

[flicko]

If the next GTA was to be set in Vice City, I can 100% guarantee that Rockstar aren't stupid enough to name the game; Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. I don't quite understand what you're trying to say, especially since IV was set in a completely rehashed Liberty City (reminiscent to your prospect of a possible Vice City return), and I'm pretty certain IV's sales exceeded expectations.

[Girish]

Is the amount of people buying games on a whim so large that R* need to give naming their games a more than needed thought? I can guarantee that if GTA IV was named GTA: Liberty City, it'd have sold the same amount of copies it did. The point is that when someone goes to the store to buy a game; they either know about the game in advance or they have the common sense to turn over the game box and read the description of the game.

 

So, in short, I don't think the sub-name of a game is going to pose that much of a problem. Be it whatever, the amount of people buying the game isn't going down. All that it needs to have is a prefix called 'Grand Theft Auto'.

[major underscore]

First of all: I love the Vice City 1980s setting.

 

Having said that, I don't want another Vice City. Two games per city is enough, they've already done the 1980s, and I really don't see the great appeal of a present day version of Vice City.

 

Now go for something brand new or another game set in San Andreas.

[Algonquin Assassin]

I reckon if it is going to be set in VC again the name will probably fall under the lines of GTA IV- Vice City, or my personal favourite GTA- City of Vice.

[chngdman]

GTA: Vice, Not Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. Possible? You decide.

 

And a new vice city would sell better than IV did. There are so many people out there that never played III and have only played Vice City, and the same is true for a lot of San Andreas players that may have seen the older two titles, but didn't get into them. With the features of San Andreas, you can understand why newcomers to the series couldn't get into Vice and III. One, the features, and two, they don't remember the 80s like a lot of people who have been with the series since pre-3D, even.

 

That said, I need to point out that I am not speculating which era of time GTA: Vice will take place in, if that ends up the next game. I am however stating that a new generation Vice City would sell two times as well as IV did - and IV is far from done selling. They will sell many more copies with each release of those 2 episodes and any episodes after, which of course means they will sell the episodes as well.

 

GTA: Vice, expect it require ownership of GTA IV, as well. Expect that from Day One. By then, IV will be cheaper, and expect it to be a requirement, that's all I can really stress, is to expect IV to be a requirement for the next two games. I don't mind, milk it. I support it, great way to cope with expanding development costs, great way to stick to the technology you have in place as you expand that.

 

Now, another point, is that IV is III's sequel, if we just, for the sake of argument, omit the PSP titles from the discussion. A new Vice would be a sequel to vice, yea? Or will it be more like a full sized add on to the current game? Signs point to yes. Missions in IV with coke boats that come from vice. You don't think you will do that? Smuggle from Vice to Liberty? Fly from Liberty to San Andreas? Those signs in the game, on billboards, they are more than just Lore of the past, those are more than the OG Loc easter eggs. Float your map cursur over water, or just go to the water and watch the corner of your screen, in GTA IV. It will say merely "Liberty". In two years, you will be able to boat south and watch the bottom of your screen say Vice. Will it be smooth? I really doubt it. Remember loading screens in GTA III?

 

You'd go from portland to staunton, Load. You'd go from Staunton to Shoreside, Load. That is what was happening when you flew from San ANdreas to Liberty City in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Just because they only used it for one teeny tiny mission - no, actually, let me rephrase that: The fact that they did that in only one teeny tiny and short mission is enough to convince me even further that the last generation was a bunch of tech demos. Great games they were, Vice City was a masterpiece, rushed job or not, but there was a whole lot of what you see in GTA IV to be found in GTA III, VC, SA, LCS, VCS, Bully, and Manhunt 2. Just in little pieces, tiny little pieces. Built, shown, saved for when they could tie the three locations together.

 

No, Liberty isn't dead until the next round of consoles when those roll out and set a new standard, in fact, anyone ever put thought into South Bohan? Yea, you know, why is there no North Bohan? And if there isn't one, and Bohan sure is small, then why wasn't it just Bohan without the South, right guys? I dunno... Episode 2 maybe? We can hope! But let's not get them up, to get let down, at the same time!

 

So, finally drawing to a conclusion, thank you for bearing with me here, I do not see any losses at all from continuing what is already so brilliantly mapped out before our very eyes after we already saw phase one do so successfully in it's near first year out. And with the DLC coming to tide you over until Vice (never know - they could switch it up and do San An, after all, there were no San An Stories, BUT remember, Vice is mentioned Way more in Liberty City 2008), and to set more records with another strong year of main IP sales to accomidate new players that come for said DLC, I think we are all in for "what we always dreamed" these places would be.

 

A side note to consider in that the added size (vice city was tiny compared to San Andreas and Liberty City 2008) that we can presume will be added to the new Vice City is a great means to take it out of the 80s. I mean, by adding more land, you get more variety. This is hard to contrast using the two 3D Liberty City maps as an example, mainly because it is notoriously contemporary, and gray. Gotta use the imagination for now.

Edited February 8, 2009 by chngdman

[Burtington]

I think that the name is the least of their worries if they were to redo vc. however, I read somewhere (no source) that the only reason they went back to lc was because it really was not New York in 3. when i first played vc I knew it was miami. when i played sa I knew it was LA San Fran and Vegas. in 3 it could have been any generic city. so I think and hope they will start fresh with a new city and story this time around.

[polishmattsexybeast]

Is the amount of people buying games on a whim so large that R* need to give naming their games a more than needed thought? I can guarantee that if GTA IV was named GTA: Liberty City, it'd have sold the same amount of copies it did. The point is that when someone goes to the store to buy a game; they either know about the game in advance or they have the common sense to turn over the game box and read the description of the game.

 

So, in short, I don't think the sub-name of a game is going to pose that much of a problem. Be it whatever, the amount of people buying the game isn't going down. All that it needs to have is a prefix called 'Grand Theft Auto'.

totally agree. If u talk to people who know nothing about games they know the name Grand theft auto 4 though!

[QwertyAAA]

Calling a GTA IV canon game set in VC 'GTA: Vice' is f*cking stupid.

It's like calling it GTA: Prostitution or GTA: Crime.

[Jordy.]

Well Liberty City Stories sold well because GTA 3 wasn't called GTA Liberty City. Most people probably aren't even aware of the name of the city in GTA 3 until play GTA LCS.

 

But thanks for the replies, let's hope that people really aren't stupid enough to not read the back or have any knowledge of the game before hand.

 

But then again, it might not even be Vice City

[Flesh-n-Bone]

Yep, VCS is often confused with the original VC. And the LCS is a lot of times referred to as simply "Liberty City" here, if GTA3 would have been called that, then the amount of confusion it could cause would be unbelievable IMO.

 

And lol @ Qwerty's post "GTA Crime", lmao!

[Catalinaslover]

I think they should make it easy and just drop the IV + insert city name idea and go with V VI VII for next main game releses and let the ds psp and whatnot games be Gta:somethingwill

 

I really couldnt care less=no long whiny emails to R* North about city names.

 

Wherver they set it i know it will loo good and detailed, a state like they did with sa is Imo the most appaeling as it give variation and a extended feeling of freedom.

 

It would be sweet if they would begin to focus on actually making interiors and add some substances behind there creative store names=a door that opens+interior that loads.

 

With that achieved id like to see them put main focus focus on beefing up the gameplay again.