Jump to content

Do we really need SF and LV in GTA V?


Screewdriver

Recommended Posts

Simple question:

 

Do we really need San Fierro and Las Venturas in GTAV? Do people belive it won`t be good because if it`s "only" Los Santos and surrounding countryside?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think we do it will only make the story longer and better as well as multiplayer. the next trailer needs to come out so this debate can end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at it this way... they released the trailer, made it obvious it was returning to San Andreas so most people assumed it would be the whole state - until they announced Los Santos and surrounding countryside. That immediately shot a lot of people down knowing it wouldn't be the 'San Andreas' we all loved.

 

Now they've got themselves a challenge, if it really isn't the whole of San Andreas (they could just say it's not then surprise us, but its best to stick to thinking they aren't going to do that) then they have to make Los Santos and that surrounding countryside spectacular or they're going to have a lot of pissed fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so we are doin there homework for them?.... PFFT!

 

shame on them... c*nts... they dont deserve a magazine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, it don't matter if those 2 cities are added but san francisco is too boring for me, i dont mind vegas to much. R* have said the game will be set in southern cali so it wouldnt surprise me if they include san diego or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as there is more than one city and the map size is bigger than San Andreas which it probably will be then no, so long as there is lots of ground and other cities, even if they be smaller than Los Santos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only person here who thinks that the game will be better if it is only LS and surrounding countryside? I would be happy if it was just LS with no countryside since I never spend any time there in SA. But I won't mind having the countryside there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like San Fran.

 

I think Vegas could be it's own game though and I have a hunch it will be in either VI or VII.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The_Mario_Man

I just assumed they were going for another 'trilogy' that would make up the "V" era:

GTA V

GTA San Fierro

GTA Venturas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't need them, but certainly want them, however I won't expect them. Would be cool though, I miss losing all my cash in Las Venturas and getting tracked down by loan sharks. biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People assume that they're just taking LS from SA and cutting off the SF and LV parts, leaving us with a small map. V's LS is going to be bigger than SA's map, you're not even going to notice them not being there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only person here who thinks that the game will be better if it is only LS and surrounding countryside? I would be happy if it was just LS with no countryside since I never spend any time there in SA. But I won't mind having the countryside there.

I couldn't care less if SF or LV are included, provided there are enough small SoCal towns with air strips to fly to (like Palm Springs, Bakersfield, Barstow, or Santa Barbara). One big detailed city is enough for me and LS was the best city in SA by leaps and bounds. I would like LV to have its own game (I'm guessing it'll be VII, given the prevalence of the #7 in LV and the likelihood that VI will be in VC). I doubt we will see SF for a very long time. In any case, R* already confirmed these cities won't be featured in V by specifying it will take place in "a present day, reimagined Southern California." There is no debate on this matter, let's just hope there will be other intriguing SoCal locations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

People assume that they're just taking LS from SA and cutting off the SF and LV parts, leaving us with a small map. V's LS is going to be bigger than SA's map, you're not even going to notice them not being there.

It's not about size, it's about variety. SF and LV each are different from LA, they have their own atmosphere, their own vibe. What was cool in SA is that whenever you got tired of one place for a moment, you could go to another one.

 

If it's indeed only LS, I hope they make it a lot better because I didn't care much for LS in SA, I preferred SF.

 

 

 

LS was the best city in SA by leaps and bounds

 

It's your opinion, not a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they manage to include all 3 classic cities and still make them detailed enough, they can and they must do it.

 

But for me, if they make a very detailed Los Santos is enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we going to see more then one cites as the trailer has gave me a clue that on the number plate of the car it says San Andreas if the game is just based on Los santos why don't they put the number plate as that so. They will be other cites probes not SF or LV probs some different cites like San diego

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LoveMediaExecutive

No we don't really need them and I'd prefer them to focus on making one huge city and some countyside and make them as detailed and immersive as possible rather than just do three smaller cities and some country side and sacrifice the level of detail they can get by focusing on one city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we going to see more then one cites as the trailer has gave me a clue that on the number plate of the car it says San Andreas if the game is just based on Los santos why don't they put the number plate as that so. They will be other cites probes not SF or LV probs some different cites like San diego

Well, in the GTA universe, LS is part of the state of San Andreas, so I'm afraid the plates thing doesn't give us any clue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we "need" pieces of bread on top and bottom of our sandwhiches? Do cars "need" tyres? Do bloody fish "need" water to breathe! YES, you ponce! Of course we need San Fierro atleast in a game about California. Las Venturas take it or leave it but i feel like SF is such ancool city and so far has gotten the crappiest rendition of a city made yet. I loved SA,mbut that version of SF was rubbish.

GET OVER 1 BILLION IN GTA ONLINE WITH THIS GLITCH

Join the best of the best. Join the Republic of Zee.http://socialclub.rockstargames.com/member/zeegtaforums

Add me on Xbox: ZeeGTAForums and PS3: mtkgta420

The Continuing Adventures of Zeehttp://www.youtube.com/ZeeGTAForums

http://www.twitch.tv/zeegtaf

 

Deji is a coward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure GTA V will be awesome even if it doesn’t include San Fierro and Las Venturas , but I would be pleasantly surprised if Las Venturas is featured in V. smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thatstupidbug

my problem is: the game is still set in present day, and my fear is that i'll be bored soon by the setting.

 

i've already see the present in GTA IV (and TLAD, and TBOGT, and CW), i need something "older", or my fear is that the game will looks only like a "mod" for gta IV (i'm talking about settings, not gameplay).

 

maybe with SF and LV (with his various settings) things could be better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.