Los Santos will have a gang problem again.

[darthYENIK]

Did I miss something. Is there a GTA game without gangs?

[tenpennyisplainevil]

Recession = people getting desperate for money and joining gangs, am I right?

[Death2Drugs]

Did I miss something. Is there a GTA game without gangs?

Yeah, but a lot of people want them more realistically represented (i.e. mainly appearing in South Central ghettos, different sets, etc). I do too.

[73duster]

You can have gangs be a strong presence in certain neighborhoods, without having them dominate the landscape like in San Andreas. Gangs still exist, so they SHOULD be noticable in and around Los Santos, but only in specific areas. San Andreas was a story completely driven by gangs in the 90's era, GTAV seems to be about the financial struggles of society using a modern setting in L.A.

I could see gangs being involved throughout certain aspect of the game, but only in a minor role.

[Official General]

Well, they don't have that much influence in IV. At the end of TLAD, the Lost get their safehouse destroyed, they consider the triads a strong gang and try avoiding conflict with them (while Niko and Luis see them as a small gang). In TLAD, the Lost mostly fight against other biker gangs or street gangs, they rarely fight against the mafia.

 

Anyway, my point is, R* didn't really mess up by making them too influent since they are not in IV/TLAD.

@ Tipper

 

I think you slightly missed my point.

 

What I'm really saying is that I don't think Rockstar should have included biker gangs in GTA IV's underworld at all (both TLAD and AOD), especially if they were going down the realism route. Biker gangs are not that big in New York City/New Jersey and the Northeastern U.S. in general, their presence there is hardly noticeable, let alone influential.

 

Rockstar DID messed up big time by putting white biker gangs (AOD) in North Holland (TBOGT), which was based on Harlem. It just looked so out of place. Harlem is a classical stereotype of an African-American ghetto-style, neighbourhood, there is no way in real-life you can go there and see white biker gangs riding around all over the place, like you see in TBOGT version of North Holland. I know its just a game, but still, that was very poor mis-representation, which is a bit of let down, considering Rockstar got everything else about their re-imagined New York-style Liberty City near-perfect and right.

[Static94]

Well, they don't have that much influence in IV. At the end of TLAD, the Lost get their safehouse destroyed, they consider the triads a strong gang and try avoiding conflict with them (while Niko and Luis see them as a small gang). In TLAD, the Lost mostly fight against other biker gangs or street gangs, they rarely fight against the mafia.

 

Anyway, my point is, R* didn't really mess up by making them too influent since they are not in IV/TLAD.

@ Tipper

 

I think you slightly missed my point.

 

What I'm really saying is that I don't think Rockstar should have included biker gangs in GTA IV's underworld at all (both TLAD and AOD), especially if they were going down the realism route. Biker gangs are not that big in New York City/New Jersey and the Northeastern U.S. in general, their presence there is hardly noticeable, let alone influential.

 

Rockstar DID messed up big time by putting white biker gangs (AOD) in North Holland (TBOGT), which was based on Harlem. It just looked so out of place. Harlem is a classical stereotype of an African-American ghetto-style, neighbourhood, there is no way in real-life you can go there and see white biker gangs riding around all over the place, like you see in TBOGT version of North Holland. I know its just a game, but still, that was very poor mis-representation, which is a bit of let down, considering Rockstar got everything else about their re-imagined New York-style Liberty City near-perfect and right.

So what your saying was, TLAD should had been a Black Gangsta Drug Pusher from Harlem?

[Gtaman_92]

Well, they don't have that much influence in IV. At the end of TLAD, the Lost get their safehouse destroyed, they consider the triads a strong gang and try avoiding conflict with them (while Niko and Luis see them as a small gang). In TLAD, the Lost mostly fight against other biker gangs or street gangs, they rarely fight against the mafia.

 

Anyway, my point is, R* didn't really mess up by making them too influent since they are not in IV/TLAD.

@ Tipper

 

I think you slightly missed my point.

 

What I'm really saying is that I don't think Rockstar should have included biker gangs in GTA IV's underworld at all (both TLAD and AOD), especially if they were going down the realism route. Biker gangs are not that big in New York City/New Jersey and the Northeastern U.S. in general, their presence there is hardly noticeable, let alone influential.

 

Rockstar DID messed up big time by putting white biker gangs (AOD) in North Holland (TBOGT), which was based on Harlem. It just looked so out of place. Harlem is a classical stereotype of an African-American ghetto-style, neighbourhood, there is no way in real-life you can go there and see white biker gangs riding around all over the place, like you see in TBOGT version of North Holland. I know its just a game, but still, that was very poor mis-representation, which is a bit of let down, considering Rockstar got everything else about their re-imagined New York-style Liberty City near-perfect and right.

Exactly. When i saw them bikers gangs in north holland i was like wtf. R* wanted to ditch the realism gameplay in the ballad of gay tony and to me it was worst then the lost and damned. At least in gta 4 everything made since. The ballad of gay tony was just R* attempt to appeal to the people who wanted tanks and all that sh*t back from vice city.

[Official General]

 

Well, they don't have that much influence in IV. At the end of TLAD, the Lost get their safehouse destroyed, they consider the triads a strong gang and try avoiding conflict with them (while Niko and Luis see them as a small gang). In TLAD, the Lost mostly fight against other biker gangs or street gangs, they rarely fight against the mafia.

 

Anyway, my point is, R* didn't really mess up by making them too influent since they are not in IV/TLAD.

@ Tipper

 

I think you slightly missed my point.

 

What I'm really saying is that I don't think Rockstar should have included biker gangs in GTA IV's underworld at all (both TLAD and AOD), especially if they were going down the realism route. Biker gangs are not that big in New York City/New Jersey and the Northeastern U.S. in general, their presence there is hardly noticeable, let alone influential.

 

Rockstar DID messed up big time by putting white biker gangs (AOD) in North Holland (TBOGT), which was based on Harlem. It just looked so out of place. Harlem is a classical stereotype of an African-American ghetto-style, neighbourhood, there is no way in real-life you can go there and see white biker gangs riding around all over the place, like you see in TBOGT version of North Holland. I know its just a game, but still, that was very poor mis-representation, which is a bit of let down, considering Rockstar got everything else about their re-imagined New York-style Liberty City near-perfect and right.

So what your saying was, TLAD should had been a Black Gangsta Drug Pusher from Harlem?

@ Static94

 

Not really, no, but so what if I did say that ? What would be wrong with that ? In the original GTA IV and TLAD, North Holland was the turf of black street gangs and hustlers, you could see them in streets and in the projects - just like it is in its real-life counterpart, Harlem. Then all of a sudden in Ballad Of Gay Tony, North Holland was populated with white biker gangs. What was that about ? Now that made no sense at all. I did'nt care what ethnicity or background the gangs in GTA IV were, as long as they were relevant in a realistic way.

 

I would have personally preferred to see another kind of GTA IV DLC in place of TLAD, preferably a 'hood'-based one with an African-American protagonist, OR a Mafia-based one, with an Italian-American protagonist. Anyone of those two would have been more exciting and interesting in a New York-style Liberty City setting than a biker gang theme. Biker gangs would be best suited for West Coast setting, like in GTA V. However, I still enjoyed playing TLAD, but I liked Ballad better.

[StonersDarkness]

personally i think there will be a DLC of a biker gang again for V...

 

1. i do believe there are chapters of AoD and The Lost in Los Santos...

 

2. the AoD are based on a real life 1% MC, Hells Angels

 

plus, remember a few members from The Lost story were in Los Santos at a time read hereThe Lost Brotherhood

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

Well, they don't have that much influence in IV. At the end of TLAD, the Lost get their safehouse destroyed, they consider the triads a strong gang and try avoiding conflict with them (while Niko and Luis see them as a small gang). In TLAD, the Lost mostly fight against other biker gangs or street gangs, they rarely fight against the mafia.

 

Anyway, my point is, R* didn't really mess up by making them too influent since they are not in IV/TLAD.

@ Tipper

 

I think you slightly missed my point.

 

What I'm really saying is that I don't think Rockstar should have included biker gangs in GTA IV's underworld at all (both TLAD and AOD), especially if they were going down the realism route. Biker gangs are not that big in New York City/New Jersey and the Northeastern U.S. in general, their presence there is hardly noticeable, let alone influential.

 

Rockstar DID messed up big time by putting white biker gangs (AOD) in North Holland (TBOGT), which was based on Harlem. It just looked so out of place. Harlem is a classical stereotype of an African-American ghetto-style, neighbourhood, there is no way in real-life you can go there and see white biker gangs riding around all over the place, like you see in TBOGT version of North Holland. I know its just a game, but still, that was very poor mis-representation, which is a bit of let down, considering Rockstar got everything else about their re-imagined New York-style Liberty City near-perfect and right.

So what your saying was, TLAD should had been a Black Gangsta Drug Pusher from Harlem?

@ Static94

 

Not really, no, but so what if I did say that ? What would be wrong with that ? In the original GTA IV and TLAD, North Holland was the turf of black street gangs and hustlers, you could see them in streets and in the projects - just like it is in its real-life counterpart, Harlem. Then all of a sudden in Ballad Of Gay Tony, North Holland was populated with white biker gangs. What was that about ? Now that made no sense at all. I did'nt care what ethnicity or background the gangs in GTA IV were, as long as they were relevant in a realistic way.

 

I would have personally preferred to see another kind of GTA IV DLC in place of TLAD, preferably a 'hood'-based one with an African-American protagonist, OR a Mafia-based one, with an Italian-American protagonist. Anyone of those two would have been more exciting and interesting in a New York-style Liberty City setting than a biker gang theme. Biker gangs would be best suited for West Coast setting, like in GTA V. However, I still enjoyed playing TLAD, but I liked Ballad better.

To be honest General I would've preferred a hood DLC in place of TBOGT. I've always felt TLAD complimented GTA IV better, but a hood DLC would've capped off the trilogy perfectly.

 

Though I don'think The Lost or even The AOD were that big. To me their war seemed to be in the backdrop of the Russian Mafia, Italian Mafia and even The Triads. It's not as they ran the boroughs. Typically R* research well when it comes to gangs and TLAD felt fine for the setting IMO.

Edited February 5, 2012 by Miamivicecity

[Majestic81]

i just wish R* make again a GTA V DLC about the Lost , would be f*cking great

[senor_huevos_benedicto]

i just wish R* make again a GTA V DLC about the Lost , would be f*cking great

What happened to variety?

[Official General]

To be honest General I would've preferred a hood DLC in place of TBOGT. I've always felt TLAD complimented GTA IV better, but a hood DLC would've capped off the trilogy perfectly.

 

Though I don'think The Lost or even The AOD were that big. To me their war seemed to be in the backdrop of the Russian Mafia, Italian Mafia and even The Triads. It's not as they ran the boroughs. Typically R* research well when it comes to gangs and TLAD felt fine for the setting IMO.

@ Miami

 

I know that the biker gangs in GTA IV were not that big in terms of influence, control of crime, and territory in the game. But realism means a lot me when it comes to games like GTA, especially when it comes to gangs.

 

You see the problem I had with bikers gangs being in GTA IV's Liberty City is more to with the fact that biker gangs just don't realistically fit in well with New York, in terms of the city's location and its crime and gang scene. In real-life, to see a biker gang in NYC would be like seeing a once-in-a-while parade and showcase of Harleys. Bikers gangs in modern NYC are extremely rare, and that is if they even have any kind of presence there to begin with. Because of this, I did not want to see biker gangs in IV, I would have preferred a DLC to based on a crime theme that was much more realistically relevant to a New York-based setting. I very much doubt the biker gang theme in GTA IV's story had anything to do with real-life gang research, because otherwise I'm sure it would not have been in the game. I think Rockstar just decided to slightly veer away from realism for that one moment and included biker gangs in IV just to add a bit more variety and excitement to the rest of the storyline. There is nothing wrong with that in general, but I would have just preferred that realism was applied the whole way for the gangs in IV. I had no problem with biker gangs in Vice City, because in real-life its well-known there are many biker gangs in Florida. Now with V's California-based setting, biker gangs would be perfect, as there numerous biker gangs that exist and operate in California in real-life, and many of them are very powerful and dangerous too. California is well-known for it's huge biker gang criminal culture and scene, there is even a popular TV series about it.

 

I'm glad you do agree with me on preferring a 'hood'-based DLC for GTA IV though. Look at the Firefly Housing Projects in Broker, or the ghettoes and housing projects of North Holland and South Bohan, they are swarming with gun-toting Black and Hispanic street gangs like M.O.B, North Holland Huslters and the Spanish Lords. Just look at how rough and dangerous places they appear to be, a real gritty hood storyline with a drug-dealer/hustler protagonist would have been brilliant for a DLC in those daunting, concrete settings. And I really wanted to see more of Playboy X/Dwayne Forge and Elisabeta and her Latino drug crew, I don't think we saw enough of their parts of the storyline.

[Majestic81]

i just wish R* make again a GTA V DLC about the Lost , would be f*cking great

What happened to variety?

what??

[rulesback]

no!

because 90s los santos aint 2010s los santos!

[Official General]

no!

because 90s los santos aint 2010s los santos!

What is that supposed to mean ? Your point is based on that ? You obviously don't know much about this subject.

 

The street gang problem in Los Angeles is not just a 1990s thing, why do some people on here keep thinking this just because they played San Andreas ?? The guys who keep saying this obviously don't know how to research.

 

Just to inform you that in real-life, street gangs in today's Los Angeles are more present and active than ever and they are still the MAIN feature of the city's underwrold, so your point is rendered bullsh*t and nonesense.

[interpolfan11]

GTAV will be horribly inaccurate if MS13 and other Latino street gangs aren't portrayed as Los Santos' main purveyors of underworld crime.

[Patrizio]

It will be very interesting to see how Rockstar tackles the issue of gangs in GTA V.

 

Gangs have been a visible staple of GTA since GTA2 - it was not until IV however that they were, dare I say it, made more 'real', harder to spot and blended in more with their surroundings.

 

While this was far more realistic, I felt it detracted somewhat from the idea of gang areas/turf - there seemed no real threat in these areas, unlike in previous GTAs where you were quite literally risking your digital life if you ventured into the wrong area.

 

With LA having so, so many gangs, as well as many ghettos, I hope Rockstar again makes the gangs realistic but have be slightly more visible and antagonistic to the player this time around - this should hopefully be the case especially as LA Gangs are very turf conscious.

[Official General]

It will be very interesting to see how Rockstar tackles the issue of gangs in GTA V.

 

Gangs have been a visible staple of GTA since GTA2 - it was not until IV however that they were, dare I say it, made more 'real', harder to spot and blended in more with their surroundings.

 

While this was far more realistic, I felt it detracted somewhat from the idea of gang areas/turf - there seemed no real threat in these areas, unlike in previous GTAs where you were quite literally risking your digital life if you ventured into the wrong area.

 

With LA having so, so many gangs, as well as many ghettos, I hope Rockstar again makes the gangs realistic but have be slightly more visible and antagonistic to the player this time around - this should hopefully be the case especially as LA Gangs are very turf conscious.

You keep making the mistake others have made when talking about this subject. Gang members in GTA IV were much harder to spot in Liberty City because the location is based on New York, and in real-life street gangs are not always easy to distinguish amongst the general population in the New York hoods they reside in. Street gangs in New York often do not wear distinct clothing that identifies them as gang members. GTA IV nailed the street gangs perfectly, where Rockstar failed was the lack of criminal activity and violence in the areas where the street gangs were based.

 

I'm expecting gangs to be more visible and distinguishable in GTA V, seeing as it is based on Los Angeles. In real-life Los Angeles gang culture colour-code clothing is integral to gang identification, so gangs are a lot more visible amongst the general population than in New York.

[Patrizio]

It will be very interesting to see how Rockstar tackles the issue of gangs in GTA V.

 

Gangs have been a visible staple of GTA since GTA2 - it was not until IV however that they were, dare I say it, made more 'real', harder to spot and blended in more with their surroundings.

 

While this was far more realistic, I felt it detracted somewhat from the idea of gang areas/turf - there seemed no real threat in these areas, unlike in previous GTAs where you were quite literally risking your digital life if you ventured into the wrong area.

 

With LA having so, so many gangs, as well as many ghettos, I hope Rockstar again makes the gangs realistic but have be slightly more visible and antagonistic to the player this time around - this should hopefully be the case especially as LA Gangs are very turf conscious.

You keep making the mistake others have made when talking about this subject. Gang members in GTA IV were much harder to spot in Liberty City because the location is based on New York, and in real-life street gangs are not always easy to distinguish amongst the general population in the New York hoods they reside in. Street gangs in New York often do not wear distinct clothing that identifies them as gang members. GTA IV nailed the street gangs perfectly, where Rockstar failed was the lack of criminal activity and violence in the areas where the street gangs were based.

 

I'm expecting gangs to be more visible and distinguishable in GTA V, seeing as it is based on Los Angeles. In real-life Los Angeles gang culture colour-code clothing is integral to gang identification, so gangs are a lot more visible amongst the general population than in New York.

Ah I see what you're saying - it was the lack of violence from those gangs that detracted from the experience of gang areas, not their attire/appearence.

 

Interesting point about LA and the colour coded aspect of them - I wonder if they will respond to the colour of clothing the player wears?

 

Speaking for myself, I just want ghetto and run down areas to feel much more alive and threatening, rather than just looking so!

 

*Just to nitpick you say I 'keep making the same mistake', presumably you mean I 'have made the same mistake as others', as this is my first post in this topic?

 

 

[Kill Frenzy!]

I don´t care of the gangs

Anyways, i don´t want to be a part of any gang.. I want to be alone.

[Patrizio]

I don´t care of the gangs

Anyways, i don´t want to be a part of any gang.. I want to be alone.

I'm sure we will be this time around, but its still fun outside of the missions to explore the gang areas.

[Static94]

I don´t care of the gangs

Anyways, i don´t want to be a part of any gang.. I want to be alone.

I'm sure we will be this time around, but its still fun outside of the missions to explore the gang areas.

Word, I enjoy killing drug dealers for their cash.

[monkeycan8]

Gangs in la are not as big as they were in the 90's get over it..

[Trideez]

Gangs in la are not as big as they were in the 90's get over it..

You're obviously clueless.

[monkeycan8]

No im not its a fact. The 90's gangs were a lot more in your face because of the numbers. Atleast in the African American gangs now we have ms13 which is huge but you don't see gangs starting riots as it happens in the 90's I know what I'm talking about. Plus if R* wanted to do a real gang game it should be in a Chicago based city.

 

[Official General]

 

It will be very interesting to see how Rockstar tackles the issue of gangs in GTA V.

 

Gangs have been a visible staple of GTA since GTA2 - it was not until IV however that they were, dare I say it, made more 'real', harder to spot and blended in more with their surroundings.

 

While this was far more realistic, I felt it detracted somewhat from the idea of gang areas/turf - there seemed no real threat in these areas, unlike in previous GTAs where you were quite literally risking your digital life if you ventured into the wrong area.

 

With LA having so, so many gangs, as well as many ghettos, I hope Rockstar again makes the gangs realistic but have be slightly more visible and antagonistic to the player this time around - this should hopefully be the case especially as LA Gangs are very turf conscious.

You keep making the mistake others have made when talking about this subject. Gang members in GTA IV were much harder to spot in Liberty City because the location is based on New York, and in real-life street gangs are not always easy to distinguish amongst the general population in the New York hoods they reside in. Street gangs in New York often do not wear distinct clothing that identifies them as gang members. GTA IV nailed the street gangs perfectly, where Rockstar failed was the lack of criminal activity and violence in the areas where the street gangs were based.

 

I'm expecting gangs to be more visible and distinguishable in GTA V, seeing as it is based on Los Angeles. In real-life Los Angeles gang culture colour-code clothing is integral to gang identification, so gangs are a lot more visible amongst the general population than in New York.

Ah I see what you're saying - it was the lack of violence from those gangs that detracted from the experience of gang areas, not their attire/appearence.

 

Interesting point about LA and the colour coded aspect of them - I wonder if they will respond to the colour of clothing the player wears?

 

Speaking for myself, I just want ghetto and run down areas to feel much more alive and threatening, rather than just looking so!

 

*Just to nitpick you say I 'keep making the same mistake', presumably you mean I 'have made the same mistake as others', as this is my first post in this topic?

@ Paddster

 

Yeah I meant you the same mistake as others have done before regarding that subject, I have seen people say what you said before, but in different topic threads. They too also complained that they could not distinguish who was a gang member in GTA IV and then compared it to San Andreas, saying it was better in SA because they could tell who the gang members were by their color-coded clothing. I and others have to keep reminding them that Liberty City and Los Santos are based on two different cities (New York and Los Angeles), each with a different kind gang culture.

 

@ monkeycan8

 

You claim to be talking facts, but your comments indictate a lack of knowledge on the of subject gangland in America. Just beacuse street gangs are not causing riots in the ghettoes and streets, it does not mean that street gangs in Los Angeles are not big anymore, what a stupid reason to come to such a conclusion. And you are totally wrong about MS13. MS13 are not an African-American gang at all, they are a Hispanic street gang made up of members with roots in El Salvador. Street gangs in LA are still huge and ever-present. I agree with a Chicago-based GTA though, I'd love that.

[monkeycan8]

I'm sorry I can't really talk because of the phone I'm using but I know ms13 is a Hispanic game I never said they were Africanamerican i really can't go into detail til I'm on my computer but you honestly don't know what u are talking about also I know of bikers in the new York and nj man I hate this phone.

 

[monkeycan8]

Okay I'm going to say this sorry for the second post but I'm sure you have some knowledge. But gangs Re really not what they were is the 90's even big gangsters from then have no respect for the gangsters now. The 90's was a big time for gangs guYs the reason gta sanan was set in the 90's if you turned on the news in the early 90's tu would have heard about some gang activity in LA but now its not as prominen. I mean just a few weeks ago people found a dismemberd head and feet Nd hands by the Hollywood sign. Okay gangs are still there they have never left but saying they have the same weight they did in the 90's is like saying the mafia still has the same relevancy as they did in the al capone era. God damned auto correct

[Official General]

Okay I'm going to say this sorry for the second post but I'm sure you have some knowledge. But gangs Re really not what they were is the 90's even big gangsters from then have no respect for the gangsters now. The 90's was a big time for gangs guYs the reason gta sanan was set in the 90's if you turned on the news in the early 90's tu would have heard about some gang activity in LA but now its not as prominen. I mean just a few weeks ago people found a dismemberd head and feet Nd hands by the Hollywood sign. Okay gangs are still there they have never left but saying they have the same weight they did in the 90's is like saying the mafia still has the same relevancy as they did in the al capone era. God damned auto correct

Listen I've watched very recent documentaries on street gangs in Los Angeles (Gangland is a great show), and from what I can see and learn, is that LA street gangs are still around and they are bigger and badder than ever, it is just that they are no longer highly publicized and sensationalized in the media and press anymore because gang culture is no longer nothing new to the city, it has been that way for decades now, so you won't hear about it that much anymore. People in LA have just learned to live with street gang culture and get on with their everyday lives the best they can, and LA law enforcement authorities have learned how to contain it upto a certain level the best they can, but there are still regular outbreaks of near-uncontrollable street gang violence every now and then. Street gangs are as relevant to LA now as they were in the 1990s, believe me. Watch the documentaries or research and see for yourself.

 

The Italian-American Mafia still exists and it is still very active, it is just that they have just chosen to go much more deeper underground and very low-key with their illegal activities to avoid the attention, assaults and intense pressure from law enforcement they have been recieving for many decades now. But the Italian-American Mafia is still very relevant, as it still currently the most powerful single criminal organization in the United States. The Al Capone era was like a good 80 years ago, of course its relevancy in modern U.S. organized crime means nothing anymore, and even more so, Prohibition was repealed in 1933 !! That was quite an unfair comparison.