Why there are 3 cities in GTA V...

[LCstuntman]

The same people that hype them selves up with unconfirmed sh*t are the same people that say "OMGZ THEY REMOVED ALL THE [unconfimed] FEATURES OF GTA IV WOW IM BOYCOTTING ROCKSTAR"

 

I expect that to happen again...

[Halo_Override]

Rockstar did not specify only Los Santos, they only specified Los Santos. Big difference.

 

The only inarguable fact is that none of us know for certain yet what it's going to be. But the OP put together a good summary of their view.

[goldboy76]

Didn't rockstar say in 2004 before trailer 1 that there will be 3 cities?

[Staten]

They already released their officialo word stating only Los Santos. But nice research and analysis.

Where?

They (R*) have made one official statement since the release of the trailer. There are about 50 threads discussing it (of which this is one) Please take your head out your ass before posting.

I repeat myself.

 

Where?

 

Show me 1 quote, 1 web page where rockstar has confirmed that there will be ONLY one city.

Rockstar have released an announcement. The announcement says "Grand Theft Auto V heads to the city of Los Santos and surrounding hills, countryside and beaches" and explicitly mentions that the game takes place in "a re-imagined, present day Southern California." This rules out SF and LV. There will probably be small rural towns but as for anything else, that's for another thread.

[XTREME0235]

"A bold new direction in open-world freedom": Possibly hinting that the 'new direction' is the new and improved Los Santos. If this is true than Los Santos could be big enough to satisfy us enough to forget about Las Venturas and San Fierro, although it would be very hard to forget such amazing places for true GTA fans if this is the case.

 

"in a re-imagined, present day Southern California.": This may or may not say it all right there. It's not saying in re-imagined, present day Nevada (Las Vegas), it's saying 'Southern California'.

 

I don't live in the United States so that last statement I am expecting to be way off the mark, correct me if so.

[Tipper]

Didn't rockstar say in 2004 before trailer 1 that there will be 3 cities?

Yeah I think they did. But I couldn't guarantee it, it's been a while.

[BTNH]

Interstate 5 could be a big clue. In GTA IV, is there any highway based on one in real life which connects a city/state/county..? If not, Interstate 5 could be significant. If there is one however, I guess it doesnt mean much

[Tipper]

 

Rockstar have released an announcement. The announcement says "Grand Theft Auto V heads to the city of Los Santos and surrounding hills, countryside and beaches" and explicitly mentions that the game takes place in "a re-imagined, present day Southern California." This rules out SF and LV.

 

It doesn't rule them out. If their marketing plan is to make us think it's only LS and then surprise us with SF and LV later, it's logical that they don't mention those cities yet. I agree that it is not very likely, but it still can happen.

[Ryder 556]

These are some very good points, but I have a few counter arguments for some of them.

 

1. R* said it will be a re imagination of Southern California. I-5 also connects LA to San Fernando Valley, which was in San Andreas as Red County. So it's possible the I-5 will connect Los Santos with Red County, and possibly the GTA equivalent of Glendale and Burbank

 

3. Again, SoCal is more then just LA. It also includes the San Fernando area and San Diego, among others. San Fransisco is all the way up in Northern California, a very long way away from SoCal. Las Vegas isn't even in the state of California. So it's possible San Diego might be a location.

 

4. SoCal includes a large portion of the Mojave. So odds are that desert location is part of the Mojave.

 

5. SoCal has multiple mountain ranges. The mountains we saw in the trailer are more then likely part of the San Gabriel mountain range, because of their proximity to Los Santos.

 

All in all, I strongly believe it will only be Los Santos as the returning city with SF and LV left out cause they're not in SoCal.

 

And I think people are worried because of size. LA County alone is a massive area that includes multiple cities, mountain ranges, forests and and the expansive Mojave that begins in Antelope Valley(which is where I believe the prostitution scene might have taken place)

 

People are so worried about size that when R* did the formal announcement which was,

 

We are very proud to officially announce that Grand Theft Auto V is in full development.

 

Developed by series creator Rockstar North, Grand Theft Auto V heads to the city of Los Santos and surrounding hills, countryside and beaches in the largest and most ambitious game Rockstar has yet created.

 

A bold new direction in open-world freedom, storytelling, mission-based gameplay and online multiplayer, Grand Theft Auto V focuses on the pursuit of the almighty dollar in a re-imagined, present day Southern California.

 

They only read up to Los Santos, and totally missed the SoCal part. SoCal includes everything we've seen in San Andreas before and more.

Edited November 5, 2011 by ioN

[mattymcs]

Didn't rockstar say in 2004 before trailer 1 that there will be 3 cities?

Yes, they announced it was three cities when they 1st gave details about the game in May 2004. The first trailer wasn't till August 2004, so that argument is totally wrong.

 

They never tried to impy it was only Los Santos last time, if you think about it it would have been quite confusing if they had done, because they would have just called the city San Andreas.

 

 

[GrandTheftAuto101]

Why can't people accept the fact that there won't be SF and LV?

[GTAlove]

Why can't people accept the fact that there won't be SF and LV?

They're just in denial, and desperately hanging on to any hope that it could still include San Fierro and Las Venturas. How pathetic they are.

[Vanzant]

"If that plane is going to be zipping around that fast just for one city. What's going to happen? After the vineyards and huge mountain, you immediately start flying over water? I don't think so.."

 

Good thinking. No more cities surrounded by water. However if it is just Los Santos the landscape can just repeat over and over and it could end up like as in Far Cry 2 if you go too far out you pass out due to the heat and get brought back into the world.

[King Of Monra]

They already released their officialo word stating only Los Santos. But nice research and analysis.

Where?

They (R*) have made one official statement since the release of the trailer. There are about 50 threads discussing it (of which this is one) Please take your head out your ass before posting.

I repeat myself.

 

Where?

 

Show me 1 quote, 1 web page where rockstar has confirmed that there will be ONLY one city.

Rockstar have released an announcement. The announcement says "Grand Theft Auto V heads to the city of Los Santos and surrounding hills, countryside and beaches" and explicitly mentions that the game takes place in "a re-imagined, present day Southern California." This rules out SF and LV. There will probably be small rural towns but as for anything else, that's for another thread.

Southern cali is not only los santos though, so that doesn't explain anything.

 

Yes it explain how las vegas (las venturas or whatever) wont be in, cause that is in nevada.

 

an san fierro is northen.

 

but that still doesn't say that los santos is the only city.

[Tipper]

 

And I think people are worried because of size

 

Like I said countless times, it's not a matter of size. If we want SF and LV to be included, it's because they have a special feeling, they have their own vibe, they're different from LS, and that's why so many loved SA's map, the three cities gave us a lot of variety. And the thing is, by doing three cities, they let us have a favourite, it is unavoidable, every one has a favourite city in SA (at least a slight preference) and LS was not every one's favourite. Setting V only in LS is like giving us San Andreas back but without our favorite parts. So it's not about the size.

[cherrycola]

Why can't people accept the fact that there won't be SF and LV?

And why is it so damn important? One is a city with hills and cable cars, and the other is a strip full of hotels and casinos. They aren't that exciting.

[Finn 7 five 11]

They already released their officialo word stating only Los Santos. But nice research and analysis.

f*ck your an idiot, i don't understand how someone can be so stupid as to post this sh*t time and time again.

---

Good work putting all this together, i think it will be like what happened with the original san andreas, they reveal one city but there is more.

[King Of Monra]

Why can't people accept the fact that there won't be SF and LV?

And why is it so damn important? One is a city with hills and cable cars, and the other is a strip full of hotels and casinos. They aren't that exciting.

You've never been to las vegas have you?

[GTAxYushix]

It's called.. : MARKETING STRATEGY..

 

Atm they have LS.. people are like OMFG!!! it looks great and others are disappointed..

If they reveal another city the next trailer MORE people will be interested and they may even get more and more fans...

Why would they use the same Marketing as SA?? It's Rockstar guys... they will surprise us... in 2004 they announced the 3 cities before the trailer

In 2011 they announce LS after 1 trailer, 2nd trailer they prob will reveal the release date and some towns....

Los Puerta is something we have never seen before... why would they put Los Puerta if you can't go to it??

Also interstate 5.. means the car is coming from somewhere... the city is huge. but the stuff they showed us is nothing, biggest game they have ever made.. well atm it doesn't look like it is, that wind mill scene doesn't look to near the city..

 

If you drive those ways you have to come out somewhere.

[Tipper]

Why can't people accept the fact that there won't be SF and LV?

And why is it so damn important? One is a city with hills and cable cars, and the other is a strip full of hotels and casinos. They aren't that exciting.

Yeah, yeah and LA is a city with cinema studios and poor neighbourhoods filled with gangs. If I had to chose, I'd go for the hills and the cable car. But the fact is I don't want to have to chose, they can make all three in one map, it is definitely something they are able to do, that's why it's disappointing if LS is confirmed as the only city.

[SnailShell]

1. Interstate 5 - Los Puerta Freeway hints at more cities

That seems to indicate there could be more places other than Los Santos, but not necessarily San Fierro/Las Venturas.

 

2. They did it with the first GTA: San Andreas trailer

Yes, but it was known at the time of the first San Andreas trailer that it was going to be a whole state. Rockstar had already revealed that.

 

3. They have planes? They have speed of sound fighter jets? They must have airports too...

Yeah, they can have more than one airport, but others could be out in the surrounding country.

 

4. Is this a desert in the trailer?

I just assumed it was Los Santos but it does look quite deserty. Then again, even if it is, it's probably desert surrounding Los Santos. It doesn't indicate Las Venturas in the slightest.

 

5. Mount Chilliad is in the San Fierro section of the GTA San Andreas world

Don't get your point here. It was in the San Fierro section in the 2004 game, yeah, but this is a whole new era. Completely redesigned. It might not even be called Mount Chiliad this time round, just like how San Andreas might not include San Fierro or Las Venturas this time round. Remember, the first ever rendition of San Andreas was a single city based on San Francisco; Rockstar redesign things to a point where their past counterparts have no relevance.

 

6. The windmill part of the trailer is the Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm in between real world Los Angelos and San Francisco.

Again, this indicates countryside, not other cities. Rockstar have said the new game is set in Los Santos and the surrounding countryside, etc.

 

7. This is how Rockstar is.

It is. We'll have to wait and see, though the things you've pointed out indicate countryside and possibly other smaller settlements, but no way does it suggest a return of San Fierro and Las Venturas.

[Tooth]

Lemme think:

 

Ad 1. It could be a hint, or just an ingame version of a road passing through LS

 

Ad 2. Even if they did it with SA, it doesn't mean they gotta do this again. Times has changed.

 

Ad 3. Don't worry about planes and airports. This game is gonna be enormous without SF and LV, so surely we'll see at least 3 airports.

 

Ad 4. Suburbs of LA or countryside.

 

Ad 5. Who said it's Mount Chilliad?

 

Ad 6. Southern California, so LS or countside, again.

 

Ad 7. R* wants us to analyse everything they showed us, not really because they hide lots of hints. They did it to make us create theories. And your theory is just another one.

 

To be honest, Whole San Andreas, including not only LS but albo SF and LV would be absolutely great, however I think single Santos is enough to make this game absolutely rock.

 

@edit: As my post is small, I agree with mate above.

Edited November 5, 2011 by Tooth

[mattymcs]

Why can't people accept the fact that there won't be SF and LV?

And why is it so damn important? One is a city with hills and cable cars, and the other is a strip full of hotels and casinos. They aren't that exciting.

Anyone can downplay any city in the world like that.

 

Why should they make a city based on New York? It's just skyscrapers and a big statue.

 

It's a stupid viewpoint.

 

Las Vegas is one of the most exciting cities in the world. I would love the varity of 3 cities personally. They stuffed up LV last time, with just 3 casinos you could go in and very little else in the centre other than that. It was the worst city they have ever had in a game whereas it could have potentially been the best. It saddens me that it isn't coming back, by the looks of things.

[Linki]

San Francisco and Las Vegas isn't in SoCal though.

[kendoyanar]

I think it can be better without SF and LV. Los Santos will be very well done and there are more rural areas. Maybe the border of Mexico also?

[titans12321]

Rockstar said they were headed to Southern California, BUT they never said JUST Southern California.

 

For example, I could say that I'm going to the grocery store, but that doesn't mean I'm just going to the grocery store. I may stop at the gas station or the post office beforehand.

 

Until Rockstar explicitly says San Fierro and Las Venturas will not Be in Grand Theft Auto V, I have to believe they will be.

[gta5_fan]

I'm not opposed or for any one side in the argument because I have no way to know exactly what R* will do for sure but here is something to think about, no gta game has been made on one island. It has always been split up in to at least 3 islands; in some cases 1 or 2 more smaller ones so I imagine they will follow the same thing again and San Andreas will be split up into 3 islands that will include las venturas and San fierro. Thats my thoughts though

[crapmadgig]

Now that I think about it, I'd rather have a game with a redesigned, larger Las Venturas and San Fierro+ countryside instead of Los Santos+ countryside.

[nkjellman]

Man, I sure hope your right about the other citys. Wouldnt that be awsome! I think they may geographicly place them better in this game too. GTA SA's map was generaly a square shape when you think about it.

[Staten]

Rockstar have released an announcement.  The announcement says "Grand Theft Auto V heads to the city of Los Santos and surrounding hills, countryside and beaches" and explicitly mentions that the game takes place in "a re-imagined, present day Southern California."  This rules out SF and LV.  There will probably be small rural towns but as for anything else, that's for another thread.

Southern cali is not only los santos though, so that doesn't explain anything.

 

Yes it explain how las vegas (las venturas or whatever) wont be in, cause that is in nevada.

 

an san fierro is northen.

 

but that still doesn't say that los santos is the only city.

It must explain something, since you've just admitted SF and LV aren't in it. You're right that there could be other SoCal cities in the game, we won't know until they tell us, and speculating on that isn't part of this thread, since the title of this thread is about how the 3 cities are LS, SF and LV. Elsewhere, there's been speculation that San Diego is possible, or as kendoyanar suggests, maybe the border with Mexico.