Jump to content

The evolution of GTA.


Mainland Marauder

Recommended Posts

Mainland Marauder

GTA IV and its architecture started work around 2005-06 so we're on year seven or thereabouts as far as what Rockstar developers have had to work with the current hardware. V's production has undoubtedly been guided by the previous experiences, successes and failures alike. I just separate each generation's progression and view them more independently than some others, I guess.

 

Graphically, there's no way in hell it's regressed. The storylines are becoming less derivative of existing mob/crime films and the like. IV was GTA finding itself for most of its course, and by the end when you're choosing to take the money and go home or giving those who wronged you their just dessert - it found what it was looking for. V shall follow that.

 

The more diverse landscape of Southern California as compared to a concrete jungle NYC-style city on little islands in the middle of the ocean should only help this. In a Liberty City-type setting I'm not that fussed over not having planes, especially if there's a chopper. It made sense to have planes in SA when you could actually fly from one city to another, over open space in between.

 

 

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

I don't usually double post and bump but, when I do, it's because this has a new name now to better reflect its scope over 150 posts.

 

Just in the last couple days, I've seen posts that suggest different things either should or should not be in the game.

 

For one, the icon-based HUD weapon select is an icon of the series but other games - other Rockstar franchises - have improved upon this. I'm a fan of RDR's "wheel." For that matter I'm a fan of good features crossing over like that.

 

Then sometimes we have this idea where it has to be one extreme or the other. Take traffic laws. Sure, getting a star for running every red light could very well get old.

 

What's wrong, though, with some things that lend a bit more strategic approach particularly to missions? That you might not always have eight guns and a rocket launcher in your pocket. That, in a driving mission segment where you're to avoid police detection, that you actually might need to drive like a normal person for a bit.

 

Just a couple of thoughts. Please feel free to add to/refute them.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

great post mainland, gta is basically a real life simulator with a twist to make it a little fun, which is what we all like smile.gif also the story lines and plots are very well thought out icon14.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

After awhile of not playing GTA at all, I start loading up my 100% save and just start messing around.

 

The save is at the airstrip so I'm flying in the Hydra, buzzing over Area 69, getting five stars, evading SAMs and dogfighting other Hydras in the sky.

 

Before SA, this would've been an insane idea for GTA. Now we're on our fifth year of feeling let down it wasn't in IV.

 

It's just yet another immersion thing. There are other games that may let you do something, but it's got its own special quality when this is something you can do in the same "world" as all these other activities, even relatively mundane things, and, oh, I guess you can also get a rocket launcher and make BBQ out of police cars too.

 

The more things you can do, the more of the game world has a "use." If there's a functional gas station, for example, then every one of those little towns in the SA map have a purpose, as are the other stations scattered around. Without, they're just props.

 

I think that was the idea of the enterable 24-7 stores in SA, even if all you'd do inside is buy Sprunk from a vending machine and play video games-within-the-video game. There was a lottery idea posted awhile back. Why not have that if you have a convenience store that, oh, might even sell gas too. If we stuck to the bare bones, it'd be just another dead building model on the map. And then you can rob it and start a nice three-star chase. Make this something you can do anytime, not just as a side-mission type thing as in Vice.

 

The places in SA that have few functional buildings are kind of boring to me, especially after you figure out where the weapon/armor type pickups are and aren't. Much of Bayside in SA is like that, where you've got a nice little town setup but very little interactive other than the boat school and the fact there's a lone gang territory there for whatever reason.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After awhile of not playing GTA at all, I start loading up my 100% save and just start messing around.

 

The save is at the airstrip so I'm flying in the Hydra, buzzing over Area 69, getting five stars, evading SAMs and dogfighting other Hydras in the sky.

 

Before SA, this would've been an insane idea for GTA. Now we're on our fifth year of feeling let down it wasn't in IV.

 

It's just yet another immersion thing. There are other games that may let you do something, but it's got its own special quality when this is something you can do in the same "world" as all these other activities, even relatively mundane things, and, oh, I guess you can also get a rocket launcher and make BBQ out of police cars too.

 

The more things you can do, the more of the game world has a "use." If there's a functional gas station, for example, then every one of those little towns in the SA map have a purpose, as are the other stations scattered around. Without, they're just props.

 

I think that was the idea of the enterable 24-7 stores in SA, even if all you'd do inside is buy Sprunk from a vending machine and play video games-within-the-video game. There was a lottery idea posted awhile back. Why not have that if you have a convenience store that, oh, might even sell gas too. If we stuck to the bare bones, it'd be just another dead building model on the map. And then you can rob it and start a nice three-star chase. Make this something you can do anytime, not just as a side-mission type thing as in Vice.

 

The places in SA that have few functional buildings are kind of boring to me, especially after you figure out where the weapon/armor type pickups are and aren't. Much of Bayside in SA is like that, where you've got a nice little town setup but very little interactive other than the boat school and the fact there's a lone gang territory there for whatever reason.

I thought I was the only one who thought of Bayside like that. In my very first playthrough of SA years back, when I was crossing the Gant Bridge to go to Toreno's, I stopped in expecting to purchase a safehouse that I assumed would be there, but alas I as disappointed. Not even a 24/7 or a food joint. I totally agree with all of your points in this post btw, well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sublimelabs

 

That, in a driving mission segment where you're to avoid police detection, that you actually might need to drive like a normal person for a bit.

 

 

I hope the AI is advanced enough to allow for something like this. I'm all for it. Would be pretty rewarding. Like the film Drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honest Bill

I am very much for anything which makes the game challenging and adds an element of thought and strategy. I'd like it to have more depth

 

and i'm all for making more of the environment interactive, just not intrusively so. I am in favour of being able to use petrol stations, and even further in favour of being able to rob them whenever you want... I want much more in the way of random activities like that.. I really can't stress this enough.. I hope this 'bold new direction in mission based gameplay' is very much geared towards this direction.. If they do this, it could be the best GTA ever.

 

As for HUD features and stuff like that, i don't feel they need to stick to tradition and progress is most definitely welcome. I'll be disappointed if they haven't implemented some form of streamlining, like the weapon wheel you mentioned from RDR, it's infinitely more user friendly than the cycling system in GTA, so in this case, change and progress is welcome..

 

You have to evolve and adapt to survive... Just ask the dodo... oh wait, you can't..

 

But i'm definitely not stuck in my ways as much as many people on this forum, which brings us back to the original post, what is intrinsic to GTA? Well in my opinion it isn't the clunky UI or awkward shooting mechanics.. The games were great despite those things, not because of them.. Out with the old and in with the new..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

To carry on the recipe analogy, I guess you'd say crime is the main ingredient. The recipe has changed over the years, with different ingredients and combinations, but the crime element is the main appealing ingredient.

Couldn't agree more.

 

I've always thought the same thing. At this moment, the physics of the game have impressed me. Euphoria was not only a lovely thing to see in effect but you could even have fun playing with it i.e. slowly pushing people with your car would make them react. I also loved how the cars felt heavy, and the damage model was more than welcomed. As Mainland Marauder said, the street races have a very classic feel to them and I like nothing more than to rage through the streets leaving mayhem in my wake. Anyway, I digress.

 

My point is, no matter what R* adds to each instalment, there always seems to be that familiar feel of being a bad ass criminal. Not some homicidal maniac either but a man who thinks before he acts, takes his time and doesn't let anything get in the way. The crime aspect of GTA was hugely appealing when I was younger but now it's something else. I'm not quite sure what it is but, in all honesty, there isn't a thing wrong with any "recipe" they have tried. They get it right each time.

 

I'm not really into gaming anymore so I think it speaks volumes that GTA is the only series in which I invest this much attention. Another great thing is that I can go back to any of the previous games and play them with the same eager joy as when I first ever played them.

 

Great topic, man. It's good to see a well thought out idea come into this section. Let's hope other follow in your steps tounge.gif

 

Edit: This is most definitely true.

 

 

Personally, I consider GTA to be a melting pot of genres similar to the cultures in the huge metropol cities which are actually the main stars of the GTA games.

 

The cities are, indeed, one of the finest features of the series. The first time I saw Liberty City, I fell in love.

Edited by TheGreatGig23

Dudesig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder
I thought I was the only one who thought of Bayside like that. In my very first playthrough of SA years back, when I was crossing the Gant Bridge to go to Toreno's, I stopped in expecting to purchase a safehouse that I assumed would be there, but alas I as disappointed. Not even a 24/7 or a food joint. I totally agree with all of your points in this post btw, well said.

What's sad is it's one of the coolest looking locations in the game, right under the bridge, looking over the water at the SF skyline. That would've been a perfect place to place a safehouse, having that load up as soon as you walk out instead of one out in the middle of nowhere not far from Toreno's ranch where you got a free save point upon unlocking the last island.

 

Safehouses could use more function too, especially the ones without garages. It's not like there's a shortage of save points around. I know people will go "OMG NOT THE SIMS" and I'm not even a huge Sims fan, but be able to buy stuff for your pad. Money in a video game means a lot more when there's stuff you can do with it, and that train of thought lends itself to things like fuel and eating and being able to buy cars as opposed to stealing them. Yes, even in a game called Grand Theft Auto.

 

This sounds like a "wishlist" post but the point is not writing to tell the Housers and crew what I want to see in V, but how some of these seemingly superfluous things can give meaning and purpose to a lot of what's already been in place in one form or another within the series. It seems counterintuitive, but some things have a unique way of working. And GTA has become more playable and replayable the more deep and immersive it got.

 

Think - if people had to choose between GTA3 and SA to take to the ever-theoretical desert island forever, you'd have a majority liking SA. They might not have even liked SA's story or characters better, but the simple truth is there's much, much more to see and do. And replayability is good if we're going to only get a new game in the series every four or five years, because it's turned into something that deep and detailed.

 

This is why there's every reason to believe V will push and essentially determine the limits of the hardware we've got today.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Safehouses could use more function too, especially the ones without garages. It's not like there's a shortage of save points around. I know people will go "OMG NOT THE SIMS" and I'm not even a huge Sims fan, but be able to buy stuff for your pad. Money in a video game means a lot more when there's stuff you can do with it, and that train of thought lends itself to things like fuel and eating and being able to buy cars as opposed to stealing them. Yes, even in a game called Grand Theft Auto.

I really like what you say here. I believe there are many, small details within the game that could really change the tone and overall quality. I think one issue I've pondered following your post is the limited need for money, and - most importantly - it's loss of power. I think this is really influenced in numerous aspects. Weapons, although sometimes initially purchased, are collected; there's almost no need to visit a store. Food and clothing doesn't influence you financially. Safe houses just provide closer save points, nothing more, nothing advantageous.

 

In a criminal world, money is power. Though, in many instances, a protagonists power is aquired from the storyline; you technically earn it from playing story missions, but you don't feel the full effect as much as you could with a game pivoting more on money and it's uses. How exactly? I'm not sure, but I wonder if this is the angle Rockstar is making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

I'd like for them to build on some concepts that were explored in Vice City Stories, of owning businesses and other properties that could be attacked. Build a security force that can also be mustered for a big fight somewhere. So you get a little bit of that empire-building sense you got particularly in the first Vice. But even in that, at some point you start making a lot of money without enough to do with it. It was fine for its time, and it was certainly more relevant than it was in GTA3. You pay guys to run your crew, repair damage when you get hit etc. It could even be something where your forces handle it offscreen and, as long as they're equipped properly, can fight off attacks without your intervention if necessary. You can have things go on and not even necessarily interrupt what you were doing earlier.

 

San Andreas put in a lot of this stuff where, if you ignored it, it's not like irreversible bad things happened. Even if you didn't just save to abort a gang turf invasion, if you let it go that territory just becomes disputed and you'll have enemy gang members as well as your own start spawning there. Go there, shoot them up, take out a couple waves later and it's yours again if you care that much. With eating, chances are at some point your health will get low while you're running around and you'll eat if not from the restaurants then the vending machines. I have never heard of anyone starving CJ to death other than on purpose, and that takes a good while.

 

IV started reeling it in some with the over-the-top stockpiling - you couldn't carry virtually infinite amounts of ammo, so I ended up hitting the weapon shops a lot more. So, at least for the first bit of the game, money actually meant something. In SA, especially after dating Katie the nurse who allowed you to keep your stuff when you die, I'd tend not to use Ammu-Nation unless I'd been forced to lose all my weapons and I wasn't in a spot where I could just go right to all those pickups I spawned doing tags and snapshots and whatnot. In SA there was really only one instance like that, which was when you opened the second island and turn up in Angel Pine emptyhanded (but with probably lots of money).

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in changing the GTA recepy.

And my key question here is: What is that?

 

Before you can change something, you have to define what it is.

thats where I disagree. its an unknown unknown. basically we are doing: x+y=z or x+y=x+y, or something the lines of: X being what gta is without definition; x+(rpg elements)= x+rpg elements=San Andreas. you CAN change it without defining what it is as long as it doesn't compromise "what it is".

 

----> you cant have X+Y=Z if... Z+Y=X because that would change what x is. Even though it is an unknown unknown, we know what you can systematically change in an unknown to make it relatively known as an "unknown unknown" otherwise we would have an unknown unknown, unknown. (and thats basically a saints row game)

 

----> in a SR game it uses an unknown unknown, unknown formula where anything and everything can be added without compromising the X because well its unknown. Thus you have a crazy game with no real plot, zombies, alien tech, cartoon antics, dildo bats, gimp whored mode (obviously taken from the cod formula)

 

However GTA does not have this formula - Even though we do not know what X is (GTA), we DO know what it can and can not be changed to compromise what we dont know.

 

Makes sense?

 

suicidal.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Death2Drugs

I expect a lot from GTA V. I expect the RAGE engine to have advanced to completely new levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder
Thus you have a crazy game with no real plot, zombies, alien tech, cartoon antics, dildo bats, gimp whored mode (obviously taken from the cod formula)

But if it has a plot then dildos as weapons are ok? I do think GTA kind of pioneered that one, actually. And let's face it, using a dildo as either a weapon or a gift to your girlfriend as if it was a dozen roses is a kind of cartoon antics. IV moved toward a more serious tone and I think that's the trajectory we'll continue to see. GTA3/Vice/SA put GTA on the map and got it some controversy. IV was the one that earned the series some mainstream respect after it all.

 

 

I expect a lot from GTA V. I expect the RAGE engine to have advanced to completely new levels.

 

That's what I'm thinking - they've had years now to look at how IV can be improved on the same hardware. It's like with SA, they'd had time to work with the previous games, and there's much more immersion and things to see and do in SA. GTA3 has some fun missions, but I don't really pop that in unless I feel like doing those missions.

 

V should be something worth playing after you're done with the missions.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

theworldfamous

The grim/realism outlook of IV was dictated by the city and the leap graphics. That's how they look at it. They match the story up to the environment.

 

 

Houser says this new, more mature direction was dictated by the massive leap forward in the quality of the game’s graphics.

“We always try to get the tone of the story and tone of the graphics to feel seamless”, he says. “We're trying to make a world that feels like it exists. And the old graphics were far more cartoony because that was all we could to, so the story and the writing needed to be as well.”

“It's all about tone. What we're aiming for, is to make everything consistent. The whole game should feel like an integer where everything is balanced against itself and all bits are equally good.”

 

and

 

 

Houser says his writing might not necessarily continue in this darker vein (“I think it's a horses for courses approach”), depending on the nature of the releases in Rockstar’s future.

 

New York is just a gritty city, so that makes the story grittier. In Los Angeles it's all about variety to the point of fragmentation, that's what city is about. So that'll set the tone for the story and the gameplay to be much more varied and lighter. And I dunno.. GTA III was also pretty dark, gritty and more cynical than VC and SA. At the time, I mean. It has totally lost that effect because the graphics are outdated and VC and SA changed it into something more bright and comical. But at that time it felt pretty gritty, with the trash blowing down the street and the opportunity for things to go violent on just about every corner.

 

So I fully expect V to be lighter and brighter than IV and to have a lot more variety and random fun things to do. Not because they were pushing in certain direction IV and are continuing that with V but because the location and size of the thing demand it. You can't do LA and ignore the gang culture there, or hollywood. And if you do the Mexicans, you need to do the Asians and so on. There's a lot of extremes this game has to cover and that's just within the city. Add the countryside, which is like a whole different world, and this game has gotta so many notes that the story can't possibly be anything like IV's. That was a very focused, small scale narrative. Well relatively small for a 100+ hour game at least. But that's because the city is like that focused, more uniform. Imagine the difference just being able to get out of the city is going to make for the whole vibe of the game. The story is gonna have to give you reasons to go there, so things will be (more) different. Haha.

 

Damn, I hope they pull that off. The contrast between hustle and bustle of the city and the slower, more rugged outdoors. I loved that about RDR, it invited you to trek around, explore and give you interesting things to do in a way that felt right with the world, as in things happen around you and you react to it. I'm so bored with games where all you do is follow radar blips and nothing happens until you pull this switch or pass that invisible line, unless they do it really well. That's why Watch Dogs didn't impress as much (it's just AC3 engine with PhysX and DX11). Emergent gameplay, baby! cool.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder

I think of it this way - in GTA3, the city had to convey what the mute protagonist couldn't, and it fit what there was of a story of a nameless man who opened up with getting betrayed and double crossed by both his girlfriend/partner in crime. Yes, it was dark and gritty and gloomy, but much of NYC looks like that and it's the city Rockstar knows best.

 

One thing that's consistent to me in GTA is, for as much handwringing that goes on in this subforum over what a protagonist should be, it doesn't figure into the GTA experience the way it does in a lot of other games. In GTA, they all steal cars and shoot guns the same way. The star of the game is the environment you play in, and what there is to do in that environment. And really, for this purpose LA's got a wider range than NYC. You have a lot more diversity in the environment, not just countryside vs. city but in different styles of urbanity. It's not covered in tall buildings everywhere. And then when it comes to characters, it's the others you interact with who matter before the one you control. The GTA protagonist didn't speak until Vice City and only started really evolving a personality in the HD age, and then there will be people who say Niko has no personality. So then he's like all the others. The game defining your character's personality tends to not leave very much of that up to the player. This same phenomenon carries over to other similar games. You could have John Marston commit crimes, but once you were doing the missions you were invariably following the narrative of the reformed outlaw under duress helping the government kill outlaws and going back to farm with his wife and kid.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

theworldfamous

I think the mission structure is in dire need of some evolution. In IV Niko was like a task mule. "Go here, Go there, Kill him, blow up this." And off he went, dutyfully driving off in his stolen car, to shoot a couple guys and make it safely back for the next mission. As much as I love the game, that is just so ridiculously outdated, archaic and tbh boring. You drive back and forth an awful lot, and I think that's why so many people find it repetitive. Why can't we combine mission objectives, take on more than one at a time and plan our own little route through the city. Is this an open world game or what?

 

Also if you get 3 to 4 missions from every mission giver and move on to the next one, you never get really involved with anything. You just pass by. It's not realistic that you get introduced to a mob boss and he immediately trusts you with the most important jobs and then when you've saved his family.. on to the next one. Niko was like Supernanny for gangsters come to think of it. Or like a fly on the wall that occasionally shoots somebody.

 

They could've easily mixed it up a little more, make the connections and rivalries between people a little more believable and the way you do jobs for them feel a little more organic and like you're involved with them. I think Vice City did this best, with the real estate aspect added and the way the missions flowed... it was coherent and cool.

 

If you can do more missions at once it also makes sense to break bigger missions up into smaller pieces than you can complete at your leisure and in the order you choose. This gives much more opportunity to do missions like Casino heist in SA where it takes some planning and preparation to accomplish and you can mix it in with other activities. That's the way it should be done.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the mission structure is in dire need of some evolution. In IV Niko was like a task mule. "Go here, Go there, Kill him, blow up this." And off he went, dutyfully driving off in his stolen car, to shoot a couple guys and make it safely back for the next mission. As much as I love the game, that is just so ridiculously outdated, archaic and tbh boring. You drive back and forth an awful lot, and I think that's why so many people find it repetitive. Why can't we combine mission objectives, take on more than one at a time and plan our own little route through the city. Is this an open world game or what?

 

Also if you get 3 to 4 missions from every mission giver and move on to the next one, you never get really involved with anything. You just pass by. It's not realistic that you get introduced to a mob boss and he immediately trusts you with the most important jobs and then when you've saved his family.. on to the next one. Niko was like Supernanny for gangsters come to think of it. Or like a fly on the wall that occasionally shoots somebody.

 

They could've easily mixed it up a little more, make the connections and rivalries between people a little more believable and the way you do jobs for them feel a little more organic and like you're involved with them. I think Vice City did this best, with the real estate aspect added and the way the missions flowed... it was coherent and cool.

 

If you can do more missions at once it also makes sense to break bigger missions up into smaller pieces than you can complete at your leisure and in the order you choose. This gives much more opportunity to do missions like Casino heist in SA where it takes some planning and preparation to accomplish and you can mix it in with other activities. That's the way it should be done.

Really agree with you friend. There should be advanced thinking, planning and plotting in the GTA V. smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

theworldfamous

Scheming even ph34r.gif

And I don't care if that makes the game harder. If we accept it's a mature game, let's cater to mature players and get rid of the excessive handholding.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edward-Is-A-Flunky45

I feel a difference between playing the previous GTA's (GTA III era games and the First GTA I era) And GTA IV. When i first played GTA IV... I felt like it was a different game. Rockstar's pushed realism to the max on IV. I liked it, a lot. That game was perfect. But i felt some difference... Of course, the first one was because it was a HD game. But i'm talking about Storytelling and Gameplay. Decisions... The past (this was always present with the other characters like CJ... If you see "The introduction" that in-engine movie from San Andreas, you'll see how the story of CJ begins... What was he doing... I'm really expecting things like that on the Special Edition of V), The finale... Rockstar's always good on story telling, but this time, was too serious. And like Marauder said, Rockstar will keep this way on GTA V...

I'm expecting more changes in the gameplay. Not in the storytelling... Storytelling will be present in Multiplayer as well i think... They did it with Max Payne 3 and Dan Houser said he liked that mix between Storytellling and Multiplayer. But, i hope that Rockstar put the focus on Single Player. Make it longer... More immersive and interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder
And I don't care if that makes the game harder.

Right? So much complaining about how the game might be more challenging, for a game that never even tells you "game over" and make you start over like they did back in the day.

 

IV got one thing very right with a simple feature - taking cover behind walls, cars and such. Sure, there were too many "shoot and blow up everything" missions but at least this made a good many of them a more tactical exercise than in GTAs past. In SA I'd just pull out the AK or M4 leveled all the way up and get nearly automatic headshots on anyone within draw distance. In IV I used grenades like never before and got really good with them. This was best illustrated in "Revenge" where you're first clearing a path to the ship and then, row by row of crates and other cover spaces, you're gaining ground toward the cabin instead of just running in like Rambo.

 

There was a topic about being able to fire laying prone. Somebody asks what good that would be. If you had a more realistic aiming setup where you don't hold your gun purely steady while standing as if you were a statue, then that would be the way to be as accurate as possible. I guess people got too attached to hitting the target button, firing and taking everyone down.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
Mainland Marauder

Bringing this back for a little something different from the release date talk.

 

This topic was created before multiple player characters were revealed for GTA V. I'm very interested to see how this will work and how this will change the course of the series.

 

Then there's the apparently lack of purchasable properties. It's easy to think of it as a step back from Los Santos' previous SA incarnation, but perhaps this has to do with the storyline as in IV where Niko picked up safehouses according to events in the storyline.

 

That said, it'll also have to be seen how exactly the city will be divided, as the "islands" in the previous games were. Or, will the entire map be open from the beginning, with the missions taking you to different parts of the city over time?

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bringing this back for a little something different from the release date talk.

 

This topic was created before multiple player characters were revealed for GTA V. I'm very interested to see how this will work and how this will change the course of the series.

 

Then there's the apparently lack of purchasable properties. It's easy to think of it as a step back from Los Santos' previous SA incarnation, but perhaps this has to do with the storyline as in IV where Niko picked up safehouses according to events in the storyline.

 

That said, it'll also have to be seen how exactly the city will be divided, as the "islands" in the previous games were. Or, will the entire map be open from the beginning, with the missions taking you to different parts of the city over time?

It is all unlocked from the beginning. That's been confirmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mainland Marauder
Bringing this back for a little something different from the release date talk.

 

This topic was created before multiple player characters were revealed for GTA V. I'm very interested to see how this will work and how this will change the course of the series.

 

Then there's the apparently lack of purchasable properties. It's easy to think of it as a step back from Los Santos' previous SA incarnation, but perhaps this has to do with the storyline as in IV where Niko picked up safehouses according to events in the storyline.

 

That said, it'll also have to be seen how exactly the city will be divided, as the "islands" in the previous games were. Or, will the entire map be open from the beginning, with the missions taking you to different parts of the city over time?

It is all unlocked from the beginning. That's been confirmed.

I missed that. I had a lot going on in real life when they dropped all that info and probably haven't seen it all. Good deal. We'll see how it works out.

 

Think it takes away an aspect of exploration throughout the game, where you'd be playing for awhile and then have this new area to explore? Or, as I'm thinking, many players won't make it everywhere right away, especially the ones who focus more on missions.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
Mainland Marauder
Thus you have a crazy game with no real plot, zombies, alien tech, cartoon antics, dildo bats, gimp whored mode (obviously taken from the cod formula)

So I ask, how "crazy" do the new perks, bullet time etc. make things for V?

 

Last I checked, GTA was a game where your character survives head-on collisions at 100 mph and takes on an entire gang of AK-toting thugs singlehandedly, standing in the open. We're still talking about a non-reality world here.

 

We can brace for a whole new wave of "GTA is turning into (X)." If GTA never "turned into" anything there probably would not be a GTA V and this forum, which was established around the release of the bold new 3D experiment that was Grand Theft Auto III, might have never existed.

 

You could say we're all for whatever keeps the series fresh and relevant. Nobody knows what GTA should be better than Rockstar Games, no matter how much anyone here thinks otherwise.

"You tell me exactly what you want, and I'll explain to you very carefully why it cannot be."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honest Bill

To be fair everything i read in the latest previews sounds just plain awesome. It's like they've taken everything good about GTA and expanded upon it, and they've also added a lot more dynamism and depth to the entire structure.

 

I think V just might be the best GTA yet. And that's without even addressing the multiplayer which they claim has had the same treatment as the singleplayer. It's going to be great it seems.

 

You're right about the whole 'realism' thing though. Some things are positively enhanced by bringing a greater sense of reality, others are just meant to be crazy and over the top. Fortunately it seems that they will give us the opportunity to lay it both ways. Things like bullet time will only be necessary at a few points in the main mission strand, and the rest of the time you can choose not to use it if you feel it's spoiling things. You'' probably be too busy planning heists and big scores and diving over car bonnets in slow moion like a badass to complain about anything.

 

Good job Rockstar is what i say.

Edited by Honest Bill
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.