Drawing Parralels: The Past Repeats Itself

[supermortalhuman]

Okay, so the idea is to pick something from GTA III and find how it exists in GTA IV, or vice versa, then, see what it tells us about possibilities in the future (especially in terms of Vice City and San Andreas coming after III and IV are exausted - meaning, if you can prove the niko/clauded connection for someone who was in Vice And III, for example... well, you get the idea). You can use someone elses photo, and I encourage you to add to this one if you wish. You can add your own images, and they don't have to be as obvious as "Protag Vs Protag", but it will probably be easier to start with basic blocks like these:

 

This is all in the spirit that IV Canon is III Canon in HD.

 

Here is the image I began, it may need changes, it may be missing some things

 

 

 

Note: Ending girlfriend: I have seen two endings of GTA III, if I recall correctly. One with a gunshot, and one without. Am i right? It has been a long time.

 

Didn't the mafia dude in Vice City call Tommy a bum?

Edited December 24, 2009 by supermortalhuman

[bigmike72]

Anything to prove that its vice city.

[RomanViking]

why did you have Niko in Claude's outfit? In order for this to be unbiased you should show him in default clothes.

 

You're like a biased scientist who stretches the truth, and ignores any evidence that goes against what you so passionately want to be true.

 

I can kinda see how Niko is similar to Claude though. It's like Rockstar is following a formula.

 

----------------------------

 

Someone made a thread called "whatever happens, this will" and the writer goes on to reveal how Rockstar follows a very repetitive formula for each (overrated) story. Someone friendly at the beginning betrays you, another who is initially untrusted by the protag becomes close allies by the end, etc...

 

It's pretty standard practice for most writers of anything though. All crime stories have someone close change alliances; or a love interest for the protag dies, or something similar.

 

It's like standard storytelling at this point.

 

--------------------------

 

What Rockstar should do is something completely new and unheard of. That's why really popular shows/movies becaome so famous, they do something new and unheard of.

 

But Rockstar will probably just do the standard Scarface drama, or something dealing with drugs/smuggling. It will be hailed as a great achievement, but deep down we'll all know we've been told this story a million times.

 

 

[bigmike72]

why did you have Niko in Claude's outfit? In order for this to be unbiased you should show him in default clothes.

 

You're like a biased scientist who stretches the truth, and ignores any evidence that goes against what you so passionately want to be true.

 

I can kinda see how Niko is similar to Claude though. It's like Rockstar is following a formula.

 

----------------------------

 

Someone made a thread called "whatever happens, this will" and the writer goes on to reveal how Rockstar follows a very repetitive formula for each (overrated) story. Someone friendly at the beginning betrays you, another who is initially untrusted by the protag becomes close allies by the end, etc...

 

It's pretty standard practice for most writers of anything though. All crime stories have someone close change alliances; or a love interest for the protag dies, or something similar.

 

It's like standard storytelling at this point.

 

--------------------------

 

What Rockstar should do is something completely new and unheard of. That's why really popular shows/movies becaome so famous, they do something new and unheard of.

 

But Rockstar will probably just do the standard Scarface drama, or something dealing with drugs/smuggling. It will be hailed as a great achievement, but deep down we'll all know we've been told this story a million times.

The Vice City fanboys will love it.

[supermortalhuman]

New and unheard of is Agent.

 

GTA was new and unheard of changes with III. Lightning striking twice is unlikely, thus this is a continuation of something that already occurred.

 

I used the claude clothes because they come with the game, and for the same reason these parallels can be drawn, and it's probably the whole reason they used that outfit as a clue:

 

This is GTA III cannon over again, in HD. Not just models, but all ways. The protagonists parallels in my pic show that much, but so do other parts of the game...

 

I shouldn't even have to explain my thinking in using that outfit.

 

You act like it's a mod or something I did to sway the truth.

 

Now, I started my topic to draw parallels - not to complain about them - so that's what I hope to see begin happening, because this could be a really interesting topic if people stop following me around and screaming vice city. Vice City may not be confirmed, but it IS the most likely place with the most possibility delivered within GTA IV itself - use Vice and San as tools for your III/IV parallels.

 

Pegorino is OBVIOUSLY Salvatore Leone, same driveway, same job, Pegorinos = Leones.

 

Anyone notice more about niko and claude yet?

 

Come on guys, there is a lot more to be drawn and I don't want to be the only person saying it (I will only get ganged up on).

Edited December 25, 2009 by supermortalhuman

[bobgtafan]

This is the dumbest thread I've seen in a long f*cking time. Seriously? Are you telling me that because Claude Speed and Niko Bellic have a few of the same characteristics R* is following a pattern? Really? OK lets go ever this alittle bit.

Does not speak/ Does not speak english very well.

 

Last time I checked Niko knew almost all the terms used in the game, had a full conversation with characters in english 99 percent of the time, and only didn't understand American culture.

 

Follows orders, Like a dog for the Mafia.

 

Don't you see a problem with that logic already? Niko didn't always follow orders, he wasn't the Mafia's dog and let them know it. Also you could make that kind of comparison with any protagonist. "O well Carl and Huang worked for the Traid so GTA must be going to SA next!"

 

[

Both] dobuble crossed by their girlfriend(s)

 

Ok that is true but the levels of serevity was wildly different. Catilina sent suicuide bombers, hit stauds etc. killed business assocites, kidnapped Maria and stole half a million dollars after leaving Claude to go to jail. Michael took a case of crack and made Niko work for U.L paper which really found what he was looking for (Darko) so it really wasn't as bad anyway.

 

Girlfriends dead at the end of the game (maybe)

Well Maria wasn't really much of a girlfriend per say, nowhere in the GTA storyline did Claude show any effection for her. The only reason he raided the compound was to kill Catilina. He was mad at her for getting him trobule with the Mob ( as shown through his emotions at the docks). And yes Niko's girlfriend of died but that was more show to show that you can't just leave crime. TO further downplay any Claude-Niko connection this is what R* said about Claude.

 

 

We're a long way from having just sort of a great big, white, alpha-male dude running around with a bazooka. Our games aren't really set up like that

http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=1&cId=3167500

 

This thread is a joke the next GTA isn't going to be Vice City or SA why? This link http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/863/863028p1.html

 

 

We spend years of our lives making these worlds we don't want to retread old ground and "up-res" something we had already done

 

The only reason they redid Liberty was because they never did New York City before! Lets say they do do Vice or SA it's not going to be Miami, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, or San Fierro. Why? because they have already did them.

[Lioshenka]

One thing I can tll you for sure - there will be a 'copter in top-left corner on the cover of the game.

[supermortalhuman]

hahaha, I am inclined to agree.

 

@bobgtafan - ready?

 

Michelle Doublecrossed niko by being undercover and not even using her real name.

 

Catalina did that to claude by shooting him in the head.

 

Both are acts of stabbing someone in the back, doublecrossing then. Michelle's story is High Definition, Catalina's, is not.

 

-

 

English: Niko has just as many moments where he does not know what people are saying and just gets pointed to the task as moments where he actually understands what's going on. He struggles repeatedly to understand Manny, Playboy X, Little Jacob, and others. He struggles to have regular conversations with all of the different dialects he is faced with.

 

-

 

I'm getting a phone call, whatever

Edited December 25, 2009 by supermortalhuman

[bobgtafan]

hahaha, I am inclined to agree.

 

@bobgtafan - ready?

 

Michelle Doublecrossed niko by being undercover and not even using her real name.

 

Catalina did that to claude by shooting him in the head.

 

Both are acts of stabbing someone in the back, doublecrossing then. Michelle's story is High Definition, Catalina's, is not.

 

-

 

English: Niko has just as many moments where he does not know what people are saying and just gets pointed to the task as moments where he actually understands what's going on. He struggles repeatedly to understand Manny, Playboy X, Little Jacob, and others. He struggles to have regular conversations with all of the different dialects he is faced with.

 

-

 

I'm getting a phone call, whatever

Go ahead answer your phone and leave many points undiscussed but getting to what you said.

 

Michelle Doublecrossed niko by being undercover and not even using her real name.

 

Catalina did that to claude by shooting him in the head.

 

One was a cop...the other was a long time girlfriend that left in a in a bloody pile to go to jail for a long time. Then afterwards activily tried to kill him. THEN took half a million dollars and tried to kill him again. No comparison.

 

 

English: Niko has just as many moments where he does not know what people are saying and just gets pointed to the task as moments where he actually understands what's going on. He struggles repeatedly to understand Manny, Playboy X, Little Jacob, and others. He struggles to have regular conversations with all of the different dialects he is faced with.

 

I didn't understand Little Jacob and Badman half the time! And I've spoken English my whole life! Just because you can't understand dialects doesn't mean you don't understand a lanuague.

 

I'll be waiting for your response to all points when your finished with your life or whatever.

[supermortalhuman]

Bullsh*t bro no way! There Is a comparison because it BOILS DOWN to two different definitions (see what I did thar?) of the SAME result: Doublecrossed By Girlfriend.

 

As much you claim I will "do anything to prove vice" (paraphrase and inter-topical) - that is certainly the more logical choice than others who will "do anything to say it isn't vice"...

 

Anyway, comparisons of III/IV plz

 

You have tried to remove wind from the 3 meager points I've shared on my own, but you have failed

 

But be known, you didn't fail at what you think you did, and if I don't explain this, I'll fail you. These are all the things that point to this being the original - these main lines of titles - are the originals in HD - higher definition. Instead of a mute, you just can't understand much English except proper english... Don't come in here and niko is coherent - he's not... But he understand this plenty enough: Drive here and there, kill that, come back with something from there once in a while. Now, I hate to bring it down to that because I myself found GTA IV AND GTA III missions to be quite varied enough and made good use of the world. But the arguement is still made, and it is what that SHOWS us that has created this topic and is the more important part: That it has a Formula, as was mentioned thanks. Here we are watching them make the game they wanted to make from day one. Which means IV. And III means 3, vc, sa - all three games as one. And GTA 1 was LC, VC, SF. Will Sa include "Even More" areas that weren't there before? We KNOW vice city will include at least 3/4 MORE area to travel and still be remaining as true to GTA 1 as GTA IV's liberty city has. Vice City Never Did The Whole Map, we saw only 1/4 of Vice City (more like 1/6).

 

The old games felt like that too - rewind back to going to III from 1 and 2 days - now they have voices, in 3d, it's not sprites on cubes and streets anymore... once vice city was out, there was no way we could expect San Andreas to be what it was - or to be more than San Fierro, and Rockstar expanded there - arguably, this makes San Andreas the most original and unique setting the series has so far, as Vice City Never Did The Whole Map, and San Andreas put on 3 times as much as was originally "there" (more than 3x, but with this logic, we're using main cities here)

 

We saw like the top right hand portion of Vice City when it was in 3D. We never saw west of the airport... never saw Little Bogota...

Edited December 26, 2009 by supermortalhuman

[bobgtafan]

Lets just take what you said bit by bit.

 

Bullsh*t bro no way! There Is a comparison because it BOILS DOWN to two different definitions (see what I did thar?) of the SAME result: Doublecrossed By Girlfriend.

Yes both were betrayed, though on two majorily different levels.

 

As much you claim I will "do anything to prove vice" (paraphrase and inter-topical) - that is certainly the more logical choice than others who will "do anything to say it isn't vice"...

That's mainly because I have a link that basically says it's not Vice because they aren't going to up res old cities. I'll talk about that more in a bit.

 

Anyway, comparisons of III/IV plz

 

You have tried to remove wind from the 3 meager points I've shared on my own, but you have failed

 

But be known, you didn't fail at what you think you did, and if I don't explain this, I'll fail you. These are all the things that point to this being the original - these main lines of titles - are the originals in HD - higher definition. Instead of a mute, you just can't understand much English except proper english... Don't come in here and niko is coherent - he's not... But he understand this plenty enough: Drive here and there, kill that, come back with something from there once in a while. Now, I hate to bring it down to that because I myself found GTA IV AND GTA III missions to be quite varied enough and made good use of the world

Ok let this be known. This is not just a up res of the GTA 3 universe or a redo. Many Many Many times R* has described the 4 universe a new start. All the connections you make are random and could be made when comparing any two things. This goes for the girlfriends, lanuage etc.

 

But the arguement is still made, and it is what that SHOWS us that has created this topic and is the more important part: That it has a Formula, as was mentioned thanks. Here we are watching them make the game they wanted to make from day one. Which means IV. And III means 3, vc, sa - all three games as one. And GTA 1 was LC, VC, SF. Will Sa include "Even More" areas that weren't there before? We KNOW vice city will include at least 3/4 MORE area to travel and still be remaining as true to GTA 1 as GTA IV's liberty city has. Vice City Never Did The Whole Map, we saw only 1/4 of Vice City (more like 1/6).

Were are you getting this logic from? So because R* made some 2-D cities and redid them into 3-d they must be willing to do 3-d to 3-d? What? The reason R* redid the GTA 1 era cities was because they weren't done properly. Vice City and SA were, as stated by R* in the same article link above. And like in Liberty City ( 4 era) how do you know that R* didn't leave those parts of Vice City out on purpose? You don't do you? And another thing you forget the London expanison packs, or GTA 2. Under your logic that old 2-d cities have to be redone wouldn't it be more likely we go to London or (Future) Anywhere City?

 

Look in the end GTA 4 is not a high res of the 3 era if you keep stressing that point I will provide even more links to counter. Listen I know it's hard to beleive but your not going back to Vice City or SA. If you miss them so much play Scarface or True Crime.

[Royal55]

Okay, first of all what ever happened to the intended purpose of this topic? @bobgtafan, I think supermortalhuman had a good idea to draw more clues as to where GTA:NeXt will be, you couldn't have just stayed on topic?

I agree with both of you to be honest, it does seem logical that Vice City could indeed be the NeXt GTA, I mean it does seem to happen two times already why not a third time?

Vice City, in my opinion (not Rockstar's), was not a good interpretation of Miami or Florida if we want to get that general about it.

No matter what Rockstar says, I will still not believe anything until it is officially announced, you can never really trust just one source.

I'm not saying that Vice City will be the NeXt location but it sure is a good contender, hell anywhere is a good place as long as it isn't Liberty City and as long as it involves a great amount of crime.

I believe that we might even see multiple location, if it's Europe (which is also a possibility), we could maybe see Ireland, England, France, Italy, Switzerland, all of which I've heard mentioned sometime or another on these forums.

I'm trying to be as unbiased as I possibly can and just wanted to have my two cents on this little argument.

[Interrobangin]

Yes, there are plenty of parallels with past games. Intentional or coincidental? I couldn’t say for sure. I don’t know if we’d be able to draw anything that would give us hints for the future, though.

[bobgtafan]

Okay, first of all what ever happened to the intended purpose of this topic? @bobgtafan, I think supermortalhuman had a good idea to draw more clues as to where GTA:NeXt will be, you couldn't have just stayed on topic?

I agree with both of you to be honest, it does seem logical that Vice City could indeed be the NeXt GTA, I mean it does seem to happen two times already why not a third time?

Vice City, in my opinion (not Rockstar's), was not a good interpretation of Miami or Florida if we want to get that general about it.

No matter what Rockstar says, I will still not believe anything until it is officially announced, you can never really trust just one source.

I'm not saying that Vice City will be the NeXt location but it sure is a good contender, hell anywhere is a good place as long as it isn't Liberty City and as long as it involves a great amount of crime.

I believe that we might even see multiple location, if it's Europe (which is also a possibility), we could maybe see Ireland, England, France, Italy, Switzerland, all of which I've heard mentioned sometime or another on these forums.

I'm trying to be as unbiased as I possibly can and just wanted to have my two cents on this little argument.

Stated on topic? I am! there are no real parrallels! it's all just coinceindence! R* is not going off any formula! Why doesn't anyone get this?

[supermortalhuman]

You're Wrong Bob.

[Royal55]

Okay, first of all what ever happened to the intended purpose of this topic? @bobgtafan, I think supermortalhuman had a good idea to draw more clues as to where GTA:NeXt will be, you couldn't have just stayed on topic?

I agree with both of you to be honest, it does seem logical that Vice City could indeed be the NeXt GTA, I mean it does seem to happen two times already why not a third time?

Vice City, in my opinion (not Rockstar's), was not a good interpretation of Miami or Florida if we want to get that general about it.

No matter what Rockstar says, I will still not believe anything until it is officially announced, you can never really trust just one source.

I'm not saying that Vice City will be the NeXt location but it sure is a good contender, hell anywhere is a good place as long as it isn't Liberty City and as long as it involves a great amount of crime.

I believe that we might even see multiple location, if it's Europe (which is also a possibility), we could maybe see Ireland, England, France, Italy, Switzerland, all of which I've heard mentioned sometime or another on these forums.

I'm trying to be as unbiased as I possibly can and just wanted to have my two cents on this little argument.

Stated on topic? I am! there are no real parrallels! it's all just coinceindence! R* is not going off any formula! Why doesn't anyone get this?

I wouldn't say he's wrong but he's not right either, entirely. I mean how could you say they're not going off a specific formula?

GTA1: Liberty City>Vice City>San Andreas

GTA2: Anywhere, USA+London expansions

GTAIII (Canon): Liberty City>Vice City>San Andreas--Liberty City (Stories)> Vice City (Stories)>San Andreas (Stories)?

GTAIV: Liberty City>Vice City?

(Excluding GTA:Advance, Chinatown Wars and the two DLCS)

You can keep on saying that they did Liberty City one last time because they never did a true New York setting until your blue in the face but the fact of the matter is Vice City just makes sense as the next location.

It does make sense but I'm still not saying it will be for certain so I don't want to hear anyone say I'm being hypocritical in my posts because I'm most definitely not!

You can't always believe everything the internet tells you either buddy, I mean just because a few sites said this a couple years back doesn't always mean it's true or it doesn't always mean Rockstar is giving out correct information.

They could be giving out all these hints that point to someplace, make it clear to everyone, then when it comes down to it we all find out it's a completely different setting.

Just saying.

 

 

 

 

 

[jnzooger]

Okay, first of all what ever happened to the intended purpose of this topic? @bobgtafan, I think supermortalhuman had a good idea to draw more clues as to where GTA:NeXt will be, you couldn't have just stayed on topic?

I agree with both of you to be honest, it does seem logical that Vice City could indeed be the NeXt GTA, I mean it does seem to happen two times already why not a third time?

Vice City, in my opinion (not Rockstar's), was not a good interpretation of Miami or Florida if we want to get that general about it.

No matter what Rockstar says, I will still not believe anything until it is officially announced, you can never really trust just one source.

I'm not saying that Vice City will be the NeXt location but it sure is a good contender, hell anywhere is a good place as long as it isn't Liberty City and as long as it involves a great amount of crime.

I believe that we might even see multiple location, if it's Europe (which is also a possibility), we could maybe see Ireland, England, France, Italy, Switzerland, all of which I've heard mentioned sometime or another on these forums.

I'm trying to be as unbiased as I possibly can and just wanted to have my two cents on this little argument.

Stated on topic? I am! there are no real parrallels! it's all just coinceindence! R* is not going off any formula! Why doesn't anyone get this?

I wouldn't say he's wrong but he's not right either, entirely. I mean how could you say they're not going off a specific formula?

GTA1: Liberty City>Vice City>San Andreas

GTA2: Anywhere, USA+London expansions

GTAIII (Canon): Liberty City>Vice City>San Andreas--Liberty City (Stories)> Vice City (Stories)>San Andreas (Stories)?

GTAIV: Liberty City>Vice City?

(Excluding GTA:Advance, Chinatown Wars and the two DLCS)

You can keep on saying that they did Liberty City one last time because they never did a true New York setting until your blue in the face but the fact of the matter is Vice City just makes sense as the next location.

It does make sense but I'm still not saying it will be for certain so I don't want to hear anyone say I'm being hypocritical in my posts because I'm most definitely not!

You can't always believe everything the internet tells you either buddy, I mean just because a few sites said this a couple years back doesn't always mean it's true or it doesn't always mean Rockstar is giving out correct information.

They could be giving out all these hints that point to someplace, make it clear to everyone, then when it comes down to it we all find out it's a completely different setting.

Just saying.

Your formula layout is wrong. Without counting Adv, CtW, and the DLCs:

 

GTA1: Liberty City>San Andreas>Vice City>London>Manchester (multiplayer map)

GTA2: Anywhere (Could easily be Liberty City in the future, or the opening scenes shot in NYC could be Liberty City.)

GTA3: Liberty City>Vice City>San Andreas>Liberty City (Stories)>Vice City (Stories)

GTA4: Liberty City

 

The only "formula" is that every new console starts in Liberty City. Even with the portables; GTA1 on GBC was LC/SA/VC, Advance on GBA was LC, LCS on PSP was LC, and CtW on DS was LC.

 

Vice as the next city only makes sense if you only look at the GTA3-canon. (Which, sadly, most people do.) If you want to go quoting formulas and eras as a way to make a point, at least get them right.

 

Based on the true "formula" above, the thing that makes most sense is London next. They've done LC->SA, LC-VC, and now they need LC->London.

[FelipeVinhao]

Although the logic makes sense, my philosophy is still this one.

[bobgtafan]

Wait someone just said that because I had a link and they had "theories" you shouldn't believe what I have to say...ok then I'm finished with this. We don't know were it will be, there are no parralles