Why is it called GTA V then?

[Jacko427]

They should have called it GTA: LS.

GTAV is misleading because of only one city.

[Fitifong]

 

Grand Theft Auto: Los Santos and Surrounding Hills, Countryside and Beaches - better name

[hansenmork]

I'd wait until they announce gameplay mechanics before you wonder why they took the leap to 5

[Turin88]

Grand Theft Auto: Los Santos and Surrounding Hills, Countryside and Beaches - better name

Very catchy - I like it. GTA - LSSHCB for short.

[WF the Hobgoblin]

Why shouldn't it be called V?

[Turin88]

Why shouldn't it be called V?

Well aside from being a boring name... GTA IV was called GTA IV to emphasise the point that it was a follow-up to GTA III. Following that pattern, it would make more sense to save the title 'GTA V' for the next GTA game set in Liberty City.

[Legendary912]

I think Rockstar accepted the fact that the GTA IV Era was a huge mistake without all the features of previous games.

 

GTA V will be amazing I can't wait

[Turin88]

I think Rockstar accepted the fact that the GTA IV Era was a huge mistake without all the features of previous games.

 

GTA V will be amazing I can't wait

We're still in the GTA IV era. GTA V will likely be an improvement in many ways, but it will still have a familiar feel.

[NCONiall]

GTA III, Vice City and San Andreas formed a trilogy. So Vice City and San Andreas were like expansions onto III, they all added up, had the same characters and all. You then of course had the prequels LCS and VCS, which answered a little more questions. Rockstar North had planned the trilogy out since III.

 

GTA IV, TLaD and TBoGT form another trilogy only not as big as expansions as Vice City and San Andreas. Again this was planned out since the beginning of IV's development. As for Chinatown Wars, well I actually don't really know, to please the DS people?

 

In that interview with Dan Houser in 2009, he said that they would think of a city first and that he'd write up a script for the game. Well that pretty much shows that V hadn't been in mind during IV's development.

 

To me the roman numerals indicate that they're planning out a new trilogy, new charaters, basically an easier way of saying that is a new "era."

 

This is just what I think and I'm just basing it off the previous GTAs so I could be wrong because Rockstar can be unpredictable, those sneaky buggers.

 

EDIT: Damn spelling errors, I hate laptop keyboards...

Edited November 4, 2011 by NCONiall

[Starskos]

I've had a little look at this and seems to me that games with roman numerals, III onwards were set in the present. Named releases were set in the past, Vice city 80's and San Andreas 90's... hmmm... but then there is the stories and DLC, maybe not

[HoweyLad]

go onto google maps and type in los angeles. its facking humongous!!

[Staten]

Maybe by calling it V, Rockstar have told us where the next two games are going to be set?

[cidamelo]

Because the protagonist is CLAUDE SPEED, if it were in the IV Era, people would say he was death!!

[Slamman]

That would give it away and disappoint people, It's true people assume it to be only LS, but I don't think it will be... Only Los Santos.

 

To echo Cid, I thought there's a chance they revive Claude Speed for a real backstory and personality for the guy

[Rocks-tar]

GTA IV/V are in the same era. Whatever the name... It's just a name... doesn't change anything for me.

[CheesyJ]

Perhaps, we have moved onto a new era, a lot sooner than we did after the III era. If that is the case, it wouldn't make any sense for R* to simply call it 'Los Santos'. I don't know for definite, but that seems like the most likely thing to me.

[Turin88]

Perhaps, we have moved onto a new era, a lot sooner than we did after the III era. If that is the case, it wouldn't make any sense for R* to simply call it 'Los Santos'. I don't know for definite, but that seems like the most likely thing to me.

Defintely not a new era. It doesn't look that different from GTA IV. Certainly nowhere near the kind've change as seen between GTA 2 and GTA III, or GTA SA and GTA IV.

 

The next era will be in the next console generation.

[Halo_Override]

GTA III, Vice City and San Andreas formed a trilogy. So Vice City and San Andreas were like expansions onto III, they all added up, had the same characters and all. You then of course had the prequels LCS and VCS, which answered a little more questions. Rockstar North had planned the trilogy out since III.

 

GTA IV, TLaD and TBoGT form another trilogy only not as big as expansions as Vice City and San Andreas. Again this was planned out since the beginning of IV's development. As for Chinatown Wars, well I actually don't really know, to please the DS people?

 

In that interview with Dan Houser in 2009, he said that they would think of a city first and that he'd write up a script for the game. Well that pretty much shows that V hadn't been in mind during IV's development.

 

To me the roman numerals incidate that they're planning out a new trilogy, new charaters, basically an easier way of saying that is a new "era."

 

This is just what I think and I'm just basing it off the previous GTAs so I could be wrong because Rockstar can be unpredictable, those sneaky buggers.

I'm just gonna go ahead and repost this on every page of this thread until it dies.

[Maxaxle]

1. Chinatown Wars takes place in IV's universe.

2. Rockstar is indeed unpredictable, their next game may even take place in Carcer City, just before all of the nutjob psychopaths moved in.

3. New eras =/= new console generations. See: GTA III - GTA San Andreas. All on the Xbox and PS2.

[Legendary912]

Come on.... Rockstar accepted the fact that we needed a new GTA.

Although IV did pretty well in sales it lacked on features from previous games... *cough* San Andreas *cough*

I personally think they wanted to get away from the IV era and it's characters and bring the excitement back to the Series. (also it's been almost 4 years since the last GTA)

 

Here comes Grand Theft Auto V better than ever !

[DX2069]

thats kinda why i dont think that it is just los santos its prob all of san andreas

[Turin88]

Come on.... Rockstar accepted the fact that we needed a new GTA.

Although IV did pretty well in sales it lacked on features from previous games... *cough* San Andreas *cough*

I personally think they wanted to get away from the IV era and it's characters and bring the excitement back to the Series. (also it's been almost 4 years since the last GTA)

 

Here comes Grand Theft Auto V better than ever !

If they wanted to get away from the GTA IV era (which we're still in by the way), they wouldn't have called the game GTA V. All that name does is reminds me of GTA IV. They could not possibly have picked a closer name, unless they called it GTA IV part 2.

[Two-Strokes]

I think that, from now on, the so called era will be the game surrounded be its dlc's. Since the IV era & both dlc were a major success, I think they will exploit a lot more into that way...even more that we could imagine. Personally, I think the whole trinity stuff and replaying the museum mission in the three perspectives was f*cking brilliant and never seen before. This and the other crossover missions, of course. Be ready for some more jaw dropping stories.

[suicidehummer]

You think by now people would get the system...

 

They get new numbers when they're completely new from the ground up, as opposed to VC and SA which were built off of GTA III.

[Halo_Override]

3. New eras =/= new console generations. See: GTA III - GTA San Andreas. All on the Xbox and PS2.

III to San Andreas are all part of the same era. III, San Andreas, and Vice City are "the trilogy" in the minds of the developers; they've said this explicitly.