The III era forum section is almost dead

[Icarus]

Now I have a craving to play GTA:III again... goddamn.

 

It's a shame that I sold my PS2 and all the games last year. I guess this means I'll have to go and buy a copy of it sometime and install it on my computer, since it would bring back the nostalgia (and of course, the game that brought me to these boards).

 

I should also play Grand Theft Auto (the first one) as well - that brings back some old memories, too.

[mr_bungle]

 

fanboy fags.

NOT cool. I don't give a sh*t if it's against the rules or not, I will NOT abide this bigoted, idiotic, and ignorant hatred towards fanboys.

Sad but true.

[Otter]

In case you didn't get past the joke, I was chiding you for using fags as a pejorative. It's one thing among your friends, but you look like a complete jagoff in public.

 

Besides, I'm sure the gay community has better things to do than troll the GTAIII boards.

[Tyler]

 

Exactly my point, thank you Otter.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

I hate to have to even say this but....for some damn reason I wasn't ever impressed with the name of the character in GTAIII. Claude Speed sounds so damn thin and plastic like.

 

Hey, fancy that, being on a disk the name is perfect.....

 

 

------------------start rant------v*snip------------------------

 

 

In case you didn't get past the joke,  I was chiding you for using fags as a pejorative. It's one thing among your friends, but you look like a complete jagoff in public.

 

Besides, I'm sure the gay community has better things to do than troll the GTAIII boards.

 

I concur, that calling fanboys that or homosexuals for that matter, on the status of their orientation alone, as abominable.

 

My point of taking it further is the following.

 

I find it ridiculous that homosexuality is the focus for the European/American term fag or fagot.

 

Being set straight by, *ahem*, Brits a long time ago when someone else used the term.

 

Not having the term in my personal usage, because it sounded so lame to me, made for an interesting change of merit for the term once educated about its proper usage.

 

I decided that I agreed with the British Foreign Exchange Students; and the use of those terms toward others for their orientation was a linguistic crime in and of itself.

 

I know plenty of "Fags" and it would be a stretch to say that even one or two percent of them are homosexuals or bisexual.

 

Most of the "Fags" that I have met are probably not really sexually orientated much at all. Their spines seem more akin to the amoeba than anything else, perhaps the earthworm or slug may have something in common with their character as well. (There is always a shortage of salt....as in Salt of The Earth.)

 

Point being this: If I call you a Fag or a Fagot then it is a far cry from a statement about your orientation.

 

My statement is built on its older, historical usage.

 

A bundle of sticks used for kindling.

 

..In other words....

 

It means that the next time we burn a witch or someone else at the stake that I consider you proper kindling for sending them off to hell.

 

Why is that?

 

Because the use of the term Fag or Fagot has been recorded historically and is also argued as alleged for pointing out people to throw on top of a witch burning at the time of execution and for centuries calling someone a fag or fagot meant that one day during the mighty fires a burning you would be looking for them. (This has been argued as alleged and folklore by some and then argued by testament nad documentation by others.)

 

In other words, the terms are not just a slant or insult but a statement in the depth feeling malcontent and intolerance for someone else to the point of planning their demise as an afterthought while vanquishing someone even more wicked. (Your pathetic and not worth my time until the time you are useful as fatty firewood.)

 

Just saying.....Those Brits taught me this as the proper usage and furthered that the improper use of the term was a royal bloody piss off.

 

--------------end rant----------*snip^--------------------------

 

Back On Topic

 

The GTAIII section seems like it is dying, eh.

 

Well, what should we do about this?

 

Does the OP have any suggestions for livening up the forum section he is so concerned about?

 

I hate to be such a stickler yet if you have no suggestions about the status quo then why the thread?

 

Do you have any ideas?

 

Or is this a request for ideas or something?

Edited August 4, 2010 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[mr_bungle]

Well I was sort of basing the term of the way we use it where I live. Another word I could use was dickheads, losers etc. Not everywhere in the world does one word mean the same thing.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

 

Well I was sort of basing the term of the way we use it where I live. Another word I could use was dickheads, losers etc. Not everywhere in the world does one word mean the same thing.

No sh*t.

 

I just gave you another perspective to consider.

 

..... and now you want to take the piss?

 

*snicker

 

Which do you consider more substantial, my use of the terms or yours?

 

Just saying, you might want to think about honing your words so that they hold substance.

 

It is a liberating experience.

 

Lighten up, man, yet I do mean it all. It is still just placed here for the purpose of busting yours, and anyone else, for the regards to the forum rules.

 

Take it like a man!

Edited August 4, 2010 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[Xboxless]

I think Holygrenadefrenzy is combining a bit of Slamman and SagaciousKJB into an epic off-topic rambling that makes sense and is very long.

[Tyler]

I think xboxless is condensing HGF's complete point into such a small element, that it can be said in one sentence describing two members of GTAF.

[AlfieWilRus]

If it wasnt for Pong, we wouldnt have computer games at all.

Pong wasn't the first video game:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_video_game

 

And GTA III era forums are still active. Saying stuff like 'I don't go to those fourms anymore due to the fact of all the annoying 10 year old fanboy fags' sounds like a f*cking excuse to me.

True, but the one person I always see around the Gta III forums is Cidamelo. lol.

[AlfieWilRus]

In case you didn't get past the joke, I was chiding you for using fags as a pejorative. It's one thing among your friends, but you look like a complete jagoff in public.

 

Besides, I'm sure the gay community has better things to do than troll the GTAIII boards.

Agreed.

[IVSA_Guy]

If there was no GTA 1, then we didnt have GTA 3.

So in general, its all thanks to GTA 1 wich araised GTA 3 wich araised GTA IV.

If it wasnt for Pong, we wouldnt have computer games at all.

 

lol

If it wasn't for ENIAC we wouldn't have computers at all.

If there was no IBM, we wouldnt have Microsoft LOL

[cidamelo]

I always post on it. Why don't you post too? GTA III is an awesome game !! But I don't think the forum is so dead. A lot of people always post on there.

People, do you find me annoying? I love GTA III and I'm not so obsessed in Claude. I don't make a thousand topics about him.(I would, but I think they'd be locked anyway. )

Gundog I'm not a homosexual and I don't like porns. They're gross.

Edited August 5, 2010 by cidamelo

[trip]

If there was no GTA 1, then we didnt have GTA 3.

So in general, its all thanks to GTA 1 wich araised GTA 3 wich araised GTA IV.

If it wasnt for Pong, we wouldnt have computer games at all.

 

lol

If it wasn't for ENIAC we wouldn't have computers at all.

If there was no IBM, we wouldnt have Microsoft LOL

If we didn't have women we wouldn't have computers.

 

The term computers was used to describe the women who used to calculate trajectory paths during WWII. It just so happens to have been in the same building ENIAC was built. ENIAC was designed to replace those computers.

 

Since I picked up a 360 I managed to get my hands on VC, and SA. I would love to get III to complete my console collection.

[Tyler]

My best reccomendation is buying Vice, III, San An, VCS and LCS for PS2.

 

The pixel shading was made for ps2 (Except VCS and LCS) so the game looks almost the best it can. The only problem is that there are more bugs.

[cidamelo]

Unoriginal44 I don't like very much to play on PS2. I'm not so used with the controls. I rather computer.

[Tyler]

I am not either (I switched to 360 about a year ago) but for graphics wise it was the best. On xbox you lose any shadow of cars or objects thrown in the air.

 

Plus the cars have grime on them, a feature absent on the xbox version.

[cidamelo]

Unoriginal44 I don't have XBOX360. I wanted to buy it for my son, but he rather win a notebook. But I prefer to play in computer! We can do a lot of things while we play games. Like search for a recipe.

[trip]

Unoriginal44 I don't like very much to play on PS2. I'm not so used with the controls. I rather computer.

I hear you. I have had my xbox360 for almost a year now, and I still get controller retarded.

 

I'm a huge VC fan but I almost can't play it on the console because the controls seem so wack.

[riquenunes]

Unoriginal44  I don't like very much to play on PS2. I'm not so used with the controls. I rather computer.

I hear you. I have had my xbox360 for almost a year now, and I still get controller retarded.

 

I'm a huge VC fan but I almost can't play it on the console because the controls seem so wack.

I'm PC player too, but I'd rather play on controller instead of keyboard, for me keyboard is just so hard, especially for handling cars.

[trip]

Unoriginal44  I don't like very much to play on PS2. I'm not so used with the controls. I rather computer.

I hear you. I have had my xbox360 for almost a year now, and I still get controller retarded.

 

I'm a huge VC fan but I almost can't play it on the console because the controls seem so wack.

I'm PC player too, but I'd rather play on controller instead of keyboard, for me keyboard is just so hard, especially for handling cars.

Try mapping the car keys to the arrow keys. That is the only way I can drive. I tried to train myself to drive with wasd, but can't seem to deal with it.

[Gareth Alan Willmer]

 

I was going through the III era forum sections and I have noticed that rarely someone would post a topic or even reply to one. Its almost as if they are dead. San Andreas still has some life while Vice City is struggling but gta III seems to be almost dead. Its like a ghost town. Every time I look down to see who is viewing this forum its only me or 2 other people or just one other people! Is III and VC really dying? I mean no one seems to go to that section any more.

Although i could be under a lot of fire for posting this here goes

 

The only reason the GTA 3 era forum is dead is because Rockstar are busy focusing on GTA IV and Episodes From Liberty City. Once they get a certain number of sales and realise that the GTA Franchise is still finacially viable then they might milk the series and do a conclusion to the GTA 3 eras some how in an additional title or GTA game as an added bonus for those who have next gen systems.

 

That way more fans of Grand Theft Auto would buy the next gen systems and there games which would work out nicely for both or all companies involved.

 

Once that kicks off youll see the GTA 3 Vice City and San Andreas forums kick off again.

 

Anyone who thinks Rockstar would conclude the GTA 3 era on the Next Gen Systems and GTA IV era needs to look back at the very first Grand Theft Auto for the Playstation 1 and PC. They made GTA 3 in liberty city so they will do it again. No company throws away major revenue potential like that.

 

One last thing any new persons to the GTA 3 era could bennefit from the new GTA 3 era titles as well on the next gen systems and enjoy them so much that they would go buy GTA 3 Vice City or San Andreas.

 

 

Edited August 6, 2010 by Gareth Alan Willmer

[Gareth Alan Willmer]

Im willing to bet if enough people got together in a massive group online and emailed rockstar about concluding the GTA 3 eras on Playstation 2,3 Xbox 360 and Pc then Rockstar would quickly get to it.

 

It only takes one person to start this off.

[ldee]

The games been out since 2001, a lot of people on here probably havn't even played it (Which is a shame). Believe it or not almost everything that needs to be said about GTA 3 has been said...

I would hope that almost 90% percent of the people here have played it. Hell, I never even owned a PS2 and beat all the GTA games.

Ah, what great friends you have. I remember getting my PS2 back in the day just for VC. f*cking fail.

[Emhyr]

So, we're going to have a topic about every forum being less active or ''dead' now?

 

Yeah, its inactive, nothing you can do about it. It's days have passed, but the forums still serve and got usefull pinned topics for those who first start off with GTA.

Nice avatar

[Slynke]

I was going through the III era forum sections and I have noticed that rarely someone would post a topic or even reply to one. Its almost as if they are dead. San Andreas still has some life while Vice City is struggling but gta III seems to be almost dead. Its like a ghost town. Every time I look down to see who is viewing this forum its only me or 2 other people or just one other people! Is III and VC really dying? I mean no one seems to go to that section any more.

Although i could be under a lot of fire for posting this here goes

 

The only reason the GTA 3 era forum is dead is because Rockstar are busy focusing on GTA IV and Episodes From Liberty City. Once they get a certain number of sales and realise that the GTA Franchise is still finacially viable then they might milk the series and do a conclusion to the GTA 3 eras some how in an additional title or GTA game as an added bonus for those who have next gen systems.

 

That way more fans of Grand Theft Auto would buy the next gen systems and there games which would work out nicely for both or all companies involved.

 

Once that kicks off youll see the GTA 3 Vice City and San Andreas forums kick off again.

 

Anyone who thinks Rockstar would conclude the GTA 3 era on the Next Gen Systems and GTA IV era needs to look back at the very first Grand Theft Auto for the Playstation 1 and PC. They made GTA 3 in liberty city so they will do it again. No company throws away major revenue potential like that.

 

One last thing any new persons to the GTA 3 era could bennefit from the new GTA 3 era titles as well on the next gen systems and enjoy them so much that they would go buy GTA 3 Vice City or San Andreas.

Rockstar has no connection to our GTA3 discussions..

 

Please, stop posting.

[cidamelo]

Yes, drive is better in a console, but shoot in a console is very very hard to me! And I hate do drive with WASD. It's way better in the arrow keys. The first time I drove in GTA IV I thought it was just so hard, but now I think it's kind of easy and fun.

[lord fido]

I still read the GTA2 forum

[Killer.Khan]

That's because III is f*cking ancient. It was good but times have changed.

[Gareth Alan Willmer]

That's because III is f*cking ancient. It was good but times have changed.

And yet theres nothing stopping them from concluding the GTA 3 Era on the Xbox 360 PS3 and PC. Graphics will be updated and its a whole new additional game for the GTA Franchise.

 

Just because something is ancient doesnt mean it cant come back. Look at certain arcade titles from decades ago that came back on Xbox Live that got remade. They are still a massive success today the same can be applied to the GTA Franchise