Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. DLC
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
      7. The Diamond Casino Heist
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

GTAForums does NOT endorse or allow any kind of GTA Online modding, mod menus, tools or account selling/hacking. Do NOT post them here or advertise them, as per the forum rules.
Getzmunney

Gang Life in Los Santos

Recommended Posts

Getzmunney

 

Umm not really confirmed. Did noone tell you that black people like to colour coordinate their clothes?

Actually, a lot of people do, not just blacks, you f*cking idiot.

 

As for this, I wouldn't really jump to conclusions just yet. You never know, this stuff can easily be a reference, just like Franklin wearing the green scarf around is mouth. Same with "Ballas" being inscribed in the bench that Michael is sitting on in the trailer.

but capricornus.. its all right there in our face.. i mean mannn. Also you forgot the dude in purple sneakers and shirt being chased by CHOP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SonOfLiberty

 

Also I doubt they would have someone wearing all purple being chased for no apparent reason. This is Los Santos there will be gangs period.

I don't think anyone is doubting the existence of gangs in GTA V, but what we're saying the evidence is not sufficient enough. I admit the marking holds a bit more weight, but does it even say "Ballas"? I have to be honest it's kind of hard to read.

 

The guy jumping over the hood in purple might aswell be from the 3rd Street Saints from what you guys are saying.

 

Anyway lets say you guys are right and they do come back. I don't want GTA V feeling SA set 20 years later and if they're not the same gangs then what's the point calling them be their SA names? Just to tickle to nostalgia bone?

 

Can't R* think of new names like they done with GTA IV?

Edited by Miamivicecity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturnis

 

Just because radio stations, store names, or organizations come back doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street was even real to begin with. I think rock star is really done with that generation. Think of it like the movie warriors, real life New York City but a fictional story, fictional gangs, fictional characters. This is what rockstar meant and how they are trying to separate the whole standard gta universe from the hd universe. San Andreas was a fictional story in a "real life" Los santos. This is why Los santos, vinewood, laz low, etc are all real and return in these universes but the story line is just a fictional tale within a real city. This makes sense about the direction rock star wants or has taken so don't hold your breath for a grove street/ballas appearance.

That didnt make the least of sense and didn't help validate your argument wither.

It's because you're not using your head. R* already said these universes are not the same (read the new game informer)

 

direct quote - "The five ps2 games are one universe, and this is the high definition universe, so they don't co-exist. You would never see CJ or Tommy Vercetti, they would be like mythical characters in this world who never existed

 

 

just like characters in a movie aren't real. like Scarface in miami, make any sense yet? Miami is real, Scarface is not. R* is making los santos real, making vice city real, just the ps2 story lines aren't real. really not hard to grasped that, hence why Los santos comes back, liberty city comes back, Mt. Chilliard comes back, because in the gta world these would be the equivalent to real cities like new york and los angeles while the characters are just fictional.

What does any of that have to do with Families or Ballas? As its been said they are representations of LA gangs so why would they create new gangs when they have the perfect ones already? Im still not getting what you're saying with all this real life fake sh*t because Los Santos isn't real either way but if what I'm assuming you're trying to say is that SA was like a fictional tale in V and Los Santos in V is real then that still would have nothing to do with Families or Ballas crossing over. Either way what your saying is just as much speculation as the gangs returning but your idea is wild speculation that has no hints of being what is actually happening mainly since you're basically trying to say what R* never ever hinted at. They simply said they were different universes nothing about one or the other being real or fake.

lol dude i completely quoted Houser here, so it's not speculating. He says (pay close attention) "You would never see CJ or TV. they would be mythical characters in this world, who never existed.

 

If CJ never existed, then Grove street never existed either. Their story with Ballas never took place, just like spiderman doesn't exist in our real life world, and everything that comes with it, but new york surely does exist. The foundation of grove street was a fictional gang. how can CJ not exist, but everything that CJ experienced really truly exist? i see why you think they would, but the grove street and ballers, and whoever else were a part of that storyline, CJ's fictional life, and if he doesn't exist, then nothing they went through exist's either, its just mythical stories. However, Los santos is real like new york is real but spiderman isn't. This is the direction R* is clearly going with this, and he says it pretty clearly. The best you could get from them are homages from easter eggs, and thats about it.

 

I'm not saying there won't be gangs, im just saying the gangs that R* considers fictional won't be the gangs in this more real universe.

 

what you're thinking is, yea spiderman doesn't exist but the goblin surely does. He's involved within spidermans storyline, they both dont exist is the point. Stupid example but it makes it more clear.

Edited by Saturnis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getzmunney

 

Also I doubt they would have someone wearing all purple being chased for no apparent reason. This is Los Santos there will be gangs period.

I don't think anyone is doubting the existence of gangs in GTA V, but what we're saying the evidence is not sufficient enough. I admit the marking holds a bit more weight, but does it even say "Ballas"? I have to be honest it's kind of hard to read.

 

The guy jumping over the hood in purple might aswell from the 3rd Street Saints from what you guys are saying.

 

Anyway lets say you guys are right and they do come back. I don't want GTA V feeling SA set 20 years later and if they're not the same gangs then what's the point calling them be their SA names? Just to tickle to nostalgia bone?

 

Can't R* think of new names like they done with GTA IV?

Part nostalgia and also that could just be rockstars version of crips and bloods on a broad spectrum. Here in L.A. gang activity is still very prevalant.. maybe not as flashy but its definitely still here. I can say confidently by watching the second trailer thay r* have captured this.. No there WONT be any gang wars or no crap like that. But the families and ballas are there. Franklin and lamar just happenes to grow up in a families hood im assuming. Oh and look a little closer at lamar... Hes wearing a DARK GREEN shirt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getzmunney
Just because radio stations, store names, or organizations come back doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street was even real to begin with. I think rock star is really done with that generation. Think of it like the movie warriors, real life New York City but a fictional story, fictional gangs, fictional characters. This is what rockstar meant and how they are trying to separate the whole standard gta universe from the hd universe. San Andreas was a fictional story in a "real life" Los santos. This is why Los santos, vinewood, laz low, etc are all real and return in these universes but the story line is just a fictional tale within a real city. This makes sense about the direction rock star wants or has taken so don't hold your breath for a grove street/ballas appearance.

That didnt make the least of sense and didn't help validate your argument wither.

It's because you're not using your head. R* already said these universes are not the same (read the new game informer)

 

direct quote - "The five ps2 games are one universe, and this is the high definition universe, so they don't co-exist. You would never see CJ or Tommy Vercetti, they would be like mythical characters in this world who never existed

 

 

just like characters in a movie aren't real. like Scarface in miami, make any sense yet? Miami is real, Scarface is not. R* is making los santos real, making vice city real, just the ps2 story lines aren't real. really not hard to grasped that, hence why Los santos comes back, liberty city comes back, Mt. Chilliard comes back, because in the gta world these would be the equivalent to real cities like new york and los angeles while the characters are just fictional.

What does any of that have to do with Families or Ballas? As its been said they are representations of LA gangs so why would they create new gangs when they have the perfect ones already? Im still not getting what you're saying with all this real life fake sh*t because Los Santos isn't real either way but if what I'm assuming you're trying to say is that SA was like a fictional tale in V and Los Santos in V is real then that still would have nothing to do with Families or Ballas crossing over. Either way what your saying is just as much speculation as the gangs returning but your idea is wild speculation that has no hints of being what is actually happening mainly since you're basically trying to say what R* never ever hinted at. They simply said they were different universes nothing about one or the other being real or fake.

lol dude i completely quoted Houser here, so it's not speculating. He says (pay close attention) "You would never see CJ or TV. they would be mythical characters in this world, who never existed.

 

If CJ never existed, then Grove street never existed either. Their story with Ballas never took place, just like spiderman doesn't exist in our real life world, and everything that comes with it, but new york surely does exist. The foundation of grove street was a fictional gang. how can CJ not exist, but everything that CJ experienced really truly exist? i see why you think they would, but the grove street and ballers, and whoever else were a part of that storyline, CJ's fictional life, and if he doesn't exist, then nothing they went through exist's either, its just mythical stories. However, Los santos is real like new york is real but spiderman isn't. This is the direction R* is clearly going with this, and he says it pretty clearly. The best you could get from them are homages from easter eggs, and thats about it.

 

I'm not saying there won't be gangs, im just saying the gangs that R* considers fictional won't be the gangs in this more real universe.

DUDE.. cj is a CHARACTER... CHARACTERRRR.. damn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jai2NyceX_X

I can see where Getzmunney is coming from. He could be right, he could be wrong but he makes a valid point and backs it up with evidence instead of pulling "facts" out of thin air like most posters here do. So I would consider what he's saying and keep an open mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getzmunney

@ saturnis.. did you even read my first post? Grove st does NOT exist.. That was a set\ street in the 3 era!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
el_roy1985

I don't see why R* would put a scene in the trailer where it appears to say "BALLAS" on the bench, and have it mean nothing. They may not play a big part in the game (as in giving you that gangster SA feel again), but they could easily be in there. I doubt they would even reference anything that has to do with the SA gangs directly, just using their names and such again.

 

Seems like too much a coincidence that the guy was wearing as much purple as he was, being run down by Franklin, who was wearing a green bandana over his face earlier. Maybe he is loosely affiliated with the gang.

 

Who knows for sure, we are all just speculating. I do feel it is quite believable that they could return though, based on what we've seen. Much more believable then the poor arguments I've seen against the idea. From scanning through the thread anyways, this forum's threads grow to quickly to even hope to keep track of every post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getzmunney
I can see where Getzmunney is coming from. He could be right, he could be wrong but he makes a valid point and backs it up with evidence instead of pulling "facts" out of thin air like most posters here do. So I would consider what he's saying and keep an open mind.

Thanks for taking the time to read man. Instead of just judging me off the thread name..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dick Justice
Anyway lets say you guys are right and they do come back. I don't want GTA V feeling SA set 20 years later and if they're not the same gangs then what's the point calling them be their SA names? Just to tickle to nostalgia bone?

 

Can't R* think of new names like they done with GTA IV?

I have to agree with this sentiment. At this point, we know CJ is definitely NOT in the game, so there's that. These gangs have literally no reason to return - kind of like the mob families from III not being in IV - because Rockstar are crafting a completely new world with new criminal organizations and empires. While I don't doubt it would be nice for nostalgia for maybe a little while, but eventually I'd get over it and just say "hey, I had more than enough fun killing Ballas in 2004, I think I'm done with these guys."

 

The graffiti, for my money, definitely says Ballas though. I just don't think it's anything more than an easter egg like this in IV:

 

user posted image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getzmunney

DX where are you man? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturnis
Just because radio stations, store names, or organizations come back doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street was even real to begin with. I think rock star is really done with that generation. Think of it like the movie warriors, real life New York City but a fictional story, fictional gangs, fictional characters. This is what rockstar meant and how they are trying to separate the whole standard gta universe from the hd universe. San Andreas was a fictional story in a "real life" Los santos. This is why Los santos, vinewood, laz low, etc are all real and return in these universes but the story line is just a fictional tale within a real city. This makes sense about the direction rock star wants or has taken so don't hold your breath for a grove street/ballas appearance.

That didnt make the least of sense and didn't help validate your argument wither.

It's because you're not using your head. R* already said these universes are not the same (read the new game informer)

 

direct quote - "The five ps2 games are one universe, and this is the high definition universe, so they don't co-exist. You would never see CJ or Tommy Vercetti, they would be like mythical characters in this world who never existed

 

 

just like characters in a movie aren't real. like Scarface in miami, make any sense yet? Miami is real, Scarface is not. R* is making los santos real, making vice city real, just the ps2 story lines aren't real. really not hard to grasped that, hence why Los santos comes back, liberty city comes back, Mt. Chilliard comes back, because in the gta world these would be the equivalent to real cities like new york and los angeles while the characters are just fictional.

What does any of that have to do with Families or Ballas? As its been said they are representations of LA gangs so why would they create new gangs when they have the perfect ones already? Im still not getting what you're saying with all this real life fake sh*t because Los Santos isn't real either way but if what I'm assuming you're trying to say is that SA was like a fictional tale in V and Los Santos in V is real then that still would have nothing to do with Families or Ballas crossing over. Either way what your saying is just as much speculation as the gangs returning but your idea is wild speculation that has no hints of being what is actually happening mainly since you're basically trying to say what R* never ever hinted at. They simply said they were different universes nothing about one or the other being real or fake.

lol dude i completely quoted Houser here, so it's not speculating. He says (pay close attention) "You would never see CJ or TV. they would be mythical characters in this world, who never existed.

 

If CJ never existed, then Grove street never existed either. Their story with Ballas never took place, just like spiderman doesn't exist in our real life world, and everything that comes with it, but new york surely does exist. The foundation of grove street was a fictional gang. how can CJ not exist, but everything that CJ experienced really truly exist? i see why you think they would, but the grove street and ballers, and whoever else were a part of that storyline, CJ's fictional life, and if he doesn't exist, then nothing they went through exist's either, its just mythical stories. However, Los santos is real like new york is real but spiderman isn't. This is the direction R* is clearly going with this, and he says it pretty clearly. The best you could get from them are homages from easter eggs, and thats about it.

 

I'm not saying there won't be gangs, im just saying the gangs that R* considers fictional won't be the gangs in this more real universe.

DUDE.. cj is a CHARACTER... CHARACTERRRR.. damn

you don't get it lol. i tried explaining it but you won't let it go. He also said UNIVERSES not just characters dude. ALL THAT COMES WITH THE CHARACTERS IS INCLUDED AS THAT UNIVERSE THAT HE IS TRYING TO STRAY AWAY FROM. HOUSER SAID THIS, DIDN"T COME FROM THIN AIR. any clear now?

 

 

 

I can see where Getzmunney is coming from. He could be right, he could be wrong but he makes a valid point and backs it up with evidence instead of pulling "facts" out of thin air like most posters here do. So I would consider what he's saying and keep an open mind.

 

what evidence? it's all speculation since you think houser is "facts out of thin air". He already said he doesn't want to intertwine these worlds hence why you don't see anything from ps2 story lines in gta 4. Just like you won't see anything story wise from San Andreas in gta 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DXfan01
Just because radio stations, store names, or organizations come back doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street was even real to begin with. I think rock star is really done with that generation. Think of it like the movie warriors, real life New York City but a fictional story, fictional gangs, fictional characters. This is what rockstar meant and how they are trying to separate the whole standard gta universe from the hd universe. San Andreas was a fictional story in a "real life" Los santos. This is why Los santos, vinewood, laz low, etc are all real and return in these universes but the story line is just a fictional tale within a real city. This makes sense about the direction rock star wants or has taken so don't hold your breath for a grove street/ballas appearance.

That didnt make the least of sense and didn't help validate your argument wither.

It's because you're not using your head. R* already said these universes are not the same (read the new game informer)

 

direct quote - "The five ps2 games are one universe, and this is the high definition universe, so they don't co-exist. You would never see CJ or Tommy Vercetti, they would be like mythical characters in this world who never existed

 

 

just like characters in a movie aren't real. like Scarface in miami, make any sense yet? Miami is real, Scarface is not. R* is making los santos real, making vice city real, just the ps2 story lines aren't real. really not hard to grasped that, hence why Los santos comes back, liberty city comes back, Mt. Chilliard comes back, because in the gta world these would be the equivalent to real cities like new york and los angeles while the characters are just fictional.

What does any of that have to do with Families or Ballas? As its been said they are representations of LA gangs so why would they create new gangs when they have the perfect ones already? Im still not getting what you're saying with all this real life fake sh*t because Los Santos isn't real either way but if what I'm assuming you're trying to say is that SA was like a fictional tale in V and Los Santos in V is real then that still would have nothing to do with Families or Ballas crossing over. Either way what your saying is just as much speculation as the gangs returning but your idea is wild speculation that has no hints of being what is actually happening mainly since you're basically trying to say what R* never ever hinted at. They simply said they were different universes nothing about one or the other being real or fake.

lol dude i completely quoted Houser here, so it's not speculating. He says (pay close attention) "You would never see CJ or TV. they would be mythical characters in this world, who never existed.

 

If CJ never existed, then Grove street never existed either. Their story with Ballas never took place, just like spiderman doesn't exist in our real life world, and everything that comes with it, but new york surely does exist. The foundation of grove street was a fictional gang. how can CJ not exist, but everything that CJ experienced really truly exist? i see why you think they would, but the grove street and ballers, and whoever else were a part of that storyline, CJ's fictional life, and if he doesn't exist, then nothing they went through exist's either, its just mythical stories. However, Los santos is real like new york is real but spiderman isn't. This is the direction R* is clearly going with this, and he says it pretty clearly. The best you could get from them are homages from easter eggs, and thats about it.

 

I'm not saying there won't be gangs, im just saying the gangs that R* considers fictional won't be the gangs in this more real universe.

DUDE.. cj is a CHARACTER... CHARACTERRRR.. damn

you don't get it lol. i tried explaining it but you won't let it go. He also said UNIVERSES not just characters dude. ALL THAT COMES WITH THE CHARACTERS IS INCLUDED AS THAT UNIVERSE THAT HE IS TRYING TO STRAY AWAY FROM. HOUSER SAID THIS, DIDN"T COME FROM THIN AIR. any clear now?

 

 

 

I can see where Getzmunney is coming from. He could be right, he could be wrong but he makes a valid point and backs it up with evidence instead of pulling "facts" out of thin air like most posters here do. So I would consider what he's saying and keep an open mind.

 

what evidence? it's all speculation since you think houser is "facts out of thin air". He already said he doesn't want to intertwine these worlds hence why you don't see anything from ps2 story lines in gta 4. Just like you won't see anything story wise from San Andreas in gta 5

Explain Mt. Chilliad bro.. its confirmed .. GTA SA.. GTA V.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getzmunney
Just because radio stations, store names, or organizations come back doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street was even real to begin with. I think rock star is really done with that generation. Think of it like the movie warriors, real life New York City but a fictional story, fictional gangs, fictional characters. This is what rockstar meant and how they are trying to separate the whole standard gta universe from the hd universe. San Andreas was a fictional story in a "real life" Los santos. This is why Los santos, vinewood, laz low, etc are all real and return in these universes but the story line is just a fictional tale within a real city. This makes sense about the direction rock star wants or has taken so don't hold your breath for a grove street/ballas appearance.

That didnt make the least of sense and didn't help validate your argument wither.

It's because you're not using your head. R* already said these universes are not the same (read the new game informer)

 

direct quote - "The five ps2 games are one universe, and this is the high definition universe, so they don't co-exist. You would never see CJ or Tommy Vercetti, they would be like mythical characters in this world who never existed

 

 

just like characters in a movie aren't real. like Scarface in miami, make any sense yet? Miami is real, Scarface is not. R* is making los santos real, making vice city real, just the ps2 story lines aren't real. really not hard to grasped that, hence why Los santos comes back, liberty city comes back, Mt. Chilliard comes back, because in the gta world these would be the equivalent to real cities like new york and los angeles while the characters are just fictional.

What does any of that have to do with Families or Ballas? As its been said they are representations of LA gangs so why would they create new gangs when they have the perfect ones already? Im still not getting what you're saying with all this real life fake sh*t because Los Santos isn't real either way but if what I'm assuming you're trying to say is that SA was like a fictional tale in V and Los Santos in V is real then that still would have nothing to do with Families or Ballas crossing over. Either way what your saying is just as much speculation as the gangs returning but your idea is wild speculation that has no hints of being what is actually happening mainly since you're basically trying to say what R* never ever hinted at. They simply said they were different universes nothing about one or the other being real or fake.

lol dude i completely quoted Houser here, so it's not speculating. He says (pay close attention) "You would never see CJ or TV. they would be mythical characters in this world, who never existed.

 

If CJ never existed, then Grove street never existed either. Their story with Ballas never took place, just like spiderman doesn't exist in our real life world, and everything that comes with it, but new york surely does exist. The foundation of grove street was a fictional gang. how can CJ not exist, but everything that CJ experienced really truly exist? i see why you think they would, but the grove street and ballers, and whoever else were a part of that storyline, CJ's fictional life, and if he doesn't exist, then nothing they went through exist's either, its just mythical stories. However, Los santos is real like new york is real but spiderman isn't. This is the direction R* is clearly going with this, and he says it pretty clearly. The best you could get from them are homages from easter eggs, and thats about it.

 

I'm not saying there won't be gangs, im just saying the gangs that R* considers fictional won't be the gangs in this more real universe.

DUDE.. cj is a CHARACTER... CHARACTERRRR.. damn

you don't get it lol. i tried explaining it but you won't let it go. He also said UNIVERSES not just characters dude. ALL THAT COMES WITH THE CHARACTERS IS INCLUDED AS THAT UNIVERSE THAT HE IS TRYING TO STRAY AWAY FROM. HOUSER SAID THIS, DIDN"T COME FROM THIN AIR. any clear now?

 

 

 

I can see where Getzmunney is coming from. He could be right, he could be wrong but he makes a valid point and backs it up with evidence instead of pulling "facts" out of thin air like most posters here do. So I would consider what he's saying and keep an open mind.

 

what evidence? it's all speculation since you think houser is "facts out of thin air". He already said he doesn't want to intertwine these worlds hence why you don't see anything from ps2 story lines in gta 4. Just like you won't see anything story wise from San Andreas in gta 5

ok saturnis.. Theres no making you understand. You are set in your opinion aswell as im set in mine. I cant do nothing but respect your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sergi

You're taking what Houser said and trying to make what he said fit your argument. Thats all you've done. He said characters from past GTAs wouldn't exist in this because they are 2 different universes. In the same article you keep trying to use he says it's a schism between universes and that characters like CJ and Tommy are mythical people from eras gone. Thats all that he said no none of this V Los Santos is real and SA is fake and none of the other sh*t you keep saying. Thats ALL speculation on your part and the way you are reading into what he said. That has nothing to do with the gangs. Are some of you that slow? The Ballas and Families are based of Bloods and Crips. They Ballas and Families are in Los Santos and Bloods and Crips are in LA. There needs to be no connection at all between SA and V other then the same gangs existing and that's it. They don't need to explain why Ballas are in V the same way there need be no explanation on why Lazlow is in IV. The Ballas are based on a gang in the city that V is based on. CJ doesn't need to have existed for the Families to be in V because it's a different universe. They don't need to explain why they are there other then this is the modern day version of the gangs. You guys are trying to make it so complicated just because you don't agree with the theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getzmunney
You're taking what Houser said and trying to make what he said fit your argument. Thats all you've done. He said characters from past GTAs wouldn't exist in this because they are 2 different universes. In the same article you keep trying to use he says it's a schism between universes and that characters like CJ and Tommy are mythical people from eras gone. Thats all that he said no none of this V Los Santos is real and SA is fake and none of the other sh*t you keep saying. Thats ALL speculation on your part and the way you are reading into what he said. That has nothing to do with the gangs. Are some of you that slow? The Ballas and Families are based of Bloods and Crips. They Ballas and Families are in Los Santos and Bloods and Crips are in LA. There needs to be no connection at all between SA and V other then the same gangs existing and that's it. They don't need to explain why Ballas are in V the same way there need be no explanation on why Lazlow is in IV. The Ballas are based on a gang in the city that V is based on. CJ doesn't need to have existed for the Families to be in V because it's a different universe. They don't need to explain why they are there other then this is the modern day version of the gangs. You guys are trying to make it so complicated just because you don't agree with the theory.

icon14.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturnis
I don't see why R* would put a scene in the trailer where it appears to say "BALLAS" on the bench, and have it mean nothing. They may not play a big part in the game (as in giving you that gangster SA feel again), but they could easily be in there. I doubt they would even reference anything that has to do with the SA gangs directly, just using their names and such again.

 

Seems like too much a coincidence that the guy was wearing as much purple as he was, being run down by Franklin, who was wearing a green bandana over his face earlier. Maybe he is loosely affiliated with the gang.

 

Who knows for sure, we are all just speculating. I do feel it is quite believable that they could return though, based on what we've seen. Much more believable then the poor arguments I've seen against the idea. From scanning through the thread anyways, this forum's threads grow to quickly to even hope to keep track of every post.

It appears to say ballas to some, i don't think it does because it isn't clear enough to make out. That doesn't mean R* wants it to have some meaning. just like the claude, tommy writing in gta 4 means nothing as well, just an easter egg

 

http://www.gamesradar.com/the-top-7-gta-iv...-so-far/?page=2

 

 

 

I have to agree with this sentiment. At this point, we know CJ is definitely NOT in the game, so there's that. These gangs have literally no reason to return - kind of like the mob families from III not being in IV - because Rockstar are crafting a completely new world with new criminal organizations and empires. While I don't doubt it would be nice for nostalgia for maybe a little while, but eventually I'd get over it and just say "hey, I had more than enough fun killing Ballas in 2004, I think I'm done with these guys."

 

The graffiti, for my money, definitely says Ballas though. I just don't think it's anything more than an easter egg like this in IV:

 

you put it better than i tried to.

 

 

 

Explain Mt. Chilliad bro.. its confirmed .. GTA SA.. GTA V.

 

lol thats a landmark not a character or storyline, so what? chinatown is in gta 3 and in gta 4, so? Liberty City is in gta 3 and in gta 4, so what? i don't get why you think that means anything.

 

 

 

ok saturnis.. Theres no making you understand. You are set in your opinion aswell as im set in mine. I cant do nothing but respect your opinion.

 

I definitely respect yours and it's just a simple debate, but im going off of what the founder is saying. I would like to come back here in spring and say i told you so though smile.gif

 

 

 

You're taking what Houser said and trying to make what he said fit your argument. Thats all you've done. He said characters from past GTAs wouldn't exist in this because they are 2 different universes. In the same article you keep trying to use he says it's a schism between universes and that characters like CJ and Tommy are mythical people from eras gone. Thats all that he said no none of this V Los Santos is real and SA is fake and none of the other sh*t you keep saying. Thats ALL speculation on your part and the way you are reading into what he said. That has nothing to do with the gangs. Are some of you that slow? The Ballas and Families are based of Bloods and Crips. They Ballas and Families are in Los Santos and Bloods and Crips are in LA. There needs to be no connection at all between SA and V other then the same gangs existing and that's it. They don't need to explain why Ballas are in V the same way there need be no explanation on why Lazlow is in IV. The Ballas are based on a gang in the city that V is based on. CJ doesn't need to have existed for the Families to be in V because it's a different universe. They don't need to explain why they are there other then this is the modern day version of the gangs. You guys are trying to make it so complicated just because you don't agree with the theory.

 

 

i said the story lines and everything in it are fake, you're getting it confused. If the founder considers main characters from old games non existent in this world, then why would he bring back important pieces of their story line in GTA5? is safe to say this was a major part the whole point of the game, so why would he bring back bits and pieces of that story line, yet claim cj doesn't exist? thats like having a spiderman movie with just the goblin and no spiderman. see how stupid that is?

 

There probably will be gangs, but it wouldn't be the "ballas and grove street". The gangs exist obviously (Blood, Crips), but these names associated to them is what doesn't. Basing off of what houser says i would go all in on a table at vegas and im confident that if gangs make a return, expect new names and history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sergi

I'm done going back and forth. You'll believe what you want and I'll believe what I want. It still doesn't change the fact however you make no sense at all in your very flawed argument. With what you keep saying is similar to somebody saying well the Mafia couldn't be in IV because they were in III. The Mafia is an organization. Ballas and Families are organizations. The Families existed in SA prior to CJ and was stated to fdate back to the 70s so anything involving CJ and the Families does not have anything to do with the Families overall. R* could easily implement the Families and Ballas and not have to explain why they are there because they are gangs they are not characters and they are not focused around CJ. Thats what you're not understanding. CJ did not create the Families so if CJ never existed the Families still would have. The same with the Ballas so anything in SA is not detrimental to anything in V.

 

Like I said nothing is confirmed either way but there 's more evidence to back up this theory then anything you have said. Ballas on a bench in a main trailer as well as a suspected gang member being chased and wearing all purple. Not to mention 1 of the main characters is or was a gang member and has a fascination with green. You guys can say all you want but why would green and purple be prevelant for no reason? Why not have a black bandana covering your face since thats way more common then green. Pulling up quotes from Dan Houser that has absolutely nothing to do with this argument does not help you especially when it specifically details these are 2 different universes and the only things that dont transfer are characters. Your analogy with Spiderman and the Goblin is also the dumbest analogy I have ever seen and makes about as much sense as anything else you've said which equals not much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturnis

 

I'm done going back and forth. You'll believe what you want and I'll believe what I want. It still doesn't change the fact however you make no sense at all in your very flawed argument. With what you keep saying is similar to somebody saying well the Mafia couldn't be in IV because they were in III. The Mafia is an organization. Ballas and Families are organizations. The Families existed in SA prior to CJ and was stated to fdate back to the 70s so anything involving CJ and the Families does not have anything to do with the Families overall. R* could easily implement the Families and Ballas and not have to explain why they are there because they are gangs they are not characters and they are not focused around CJ. Thats what you're not understanding. CJ did not create the Families so if CJ never existed the Families still would have. The same with the Ballas so anything in SA is not detrimental to anything in V.

 

Like I said nothing is confirmed either way but there 's more evidence to back up this theory then anything you have said. Ballas on a bench in a main trailer as well as a suspected gang member being chased and wearing all purple. Not to mention 1 of the main characters is or was a gang member and has a fascination with green. You guys can say all you want but why would green and purple be prevelant for no reason? Why not have a black bandana covering your face since thats way more common then green. Pulling up quotes from Dan Houser that has absolutely nothing to do with this argument does not help you especially when it specifically details these are 2 different universes and the only things that dont transfer are characters. Your analogy with Spiderman and the Goblin is also the dumbest analogy I have ever seen and makes about as much sense as anything else you've said which equals not much.

fair enough you're entitled to you opinion like everyone else, but it will make more sense to you come spring time im sure. However, you bring up an interesting point though "With what you keep saying is similar to somebody saying well the Mafia couldn't be in IV because they were in III" were any organizations from gta3 in gta4? why not? We all know they are organizations and the gangs are based off of real life crime families, come on thats common sense, but you're looking at this way too realistically. Just because the bloods exist in real life doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street does. They are just representations, i fail to see how they truly do exist outside of SA. It's just a representation man, nothing more. Especially if he is (houser) trying to separate both worlds then it gives more credit to why they were just that, a part of that world only. nothing more. The analogy i gave makes perfect sense, you can't take out one thing from another world and put it into a completely different world (ignoring landmarks because R* wants to use them, its their game so whatever)

 

if what you're saying is to be believed then why aren't the Colombian Cartel, uptown yardies, diablos, forelli family, leone family all in gta 4? they are all representations of real life gangs (some) in liberty city (or whatever city) bloods and crips exist outside of just L.A. That's just its origin state, just like mafia organizations and other exist outside of any other city, Chicago comes to mind. gta4 is in liberty city, why aren't they around? this is your argument (and dont say because claude took them out lol). It comes down to because that was claude's representation of it, same thing with Tommy, and CJ. There is a reason why things in gta 1 is different from its 3 other ps2 offspring.

Edited by Saturnis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturnis

 

@ saturnis.. did you even read my first post? Grove st does NOT exist.. That was a set\ street in the 3 era!!!

back to you, yes i did im just referring to the family as a whole as grove (sorry). Now how can you say that the family exists but grove street doesn't? thats like saying the bloods exist but in this new world mob piru doesn't exist. If the family, like the other guy stated, which dates back to the 70's has its history and its a real representation, then how could you say grove wouldn't exist? that's a part of this gangs history!!! lol you guys can't have it both ways man, you can't say the family exist but grove doesn't. especially if you're porting over the gang itself plus its history in this new world like you guys are suggesting. This is why it makes perfect sense to introduce gangs in gta5 with new names and new history, which is exactly what they will probably be doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sergi
I'm done going back and forth. You'll believe what you want and I'll believe what I want. It still doesn't change the fact however you make no sense at all in your very flawed argument. With what you keep saying is similar to somebody saying well the Mafia couldn't be in IV because they were in III. The Mafia is an organization. Ballas and Families are organizations. The Families existed in SA prior to CJ and was stated to fdate back to the 70s so anything involving CJ and the Families does not have anything to do with the Families overall. R* could easily implement the Families and Ballas and not have to explain why they are there because they are gangs they are not characters and they are not focused around CJ. Thats what you're not understanding. CJ did not create the Families so if CJ never existed the Families still would have. The same with the Ballas so anything in SA is not detrimental to anything in V.

 

Like I said nothing is confirmed either way but there 's more evidence to back up this theory then anything you have said. Ballas on a bench in a main trailer as well as a suspected gang member being chased and wearing all purple. Not to mention 1 of the main characters is or was a gang member and has a fascination with green. You guys can say all you want but why would green and purple be prevelant for no reason? Why not have a black bandana covering your face since thats way more common then green. Pulling up quotes from Dan Houser that has absolutely nothing to do with this argument does not help you especially when it specifically details these are 2 different universes and the only things that dont transfer are characters. Your analogy with Spiderman and the Goblin is also the dumbest analogy I have ever seen and makes about as much sense as anything else you've said which equals not much.

fair enough you're entitled to you opinion like everyone else, but it will make more sense to you come spring time im sure. However, you bring up an interesting point though "With what you keep saying is similar to somebody saying well the Mafia couldn't be in IV because they were in III" were any organizations from gta3 in gta4? why not? We all know they are organizations and the gangs are based off of real life crime families, come on thats common sense, but you're looking at this way too realistically. Just because the bloods exist in real life doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street does. They are just representations, i fail to see how they truly do exist outside of SA. It's just a representation man, nothing more. Especially if he is (houser) trying to separate both worlds then it gives more credit to why they were just that, a part of that world only. nothing more. The analogy i gave makes perfect sense, you can't take out one thing from another world and put it into a completely different world (ignoring landmarks because R* wants to use them, its their game so whatever)

 

if what you're saying is to be believed then why aren't the Colombian Cartel, uptown yardies, diablos, forelli family, leone family all in gta 4? they are all representations of real life gangs (some) in liberty city (or whatever city) bloods and crips exist outside of just L.A. That's just its origin state, just like mafia organizations and other exist outside of any other city, Chicago comes to mind. gta4 is in liberty city, why aren't they around? this is your argument (and dont say because claude took them out lol). It comes down to because that was claude's representation of it, same thing with Tommy, and CJ. There is a reason why things in gta 1 is different from its 3 other ps2 offspring.

For 1 none of those gangs you mentioned from III are in IV because in most cases they wouldn't fit. The Colombian Cartel wasn't in IV but alot of representation of real factors in the criminal underground in NYC weren't incorparated into 4.The Forelli and Leone Family didn't exist in 4 because they obviously couldn't or else the whole seperate universe wouldn't make sense. The Yardies in a sense did return they just weren't called the Uptown Yardies. But the Mafia is a umbrella for various families. The Families and Ballas are umbrellas for various gangs. Just like in real life the various sets of Bloods and Crips are their own gangs they are just aligned under the Blood or Crip name. Thats why the Families could bein the game or Ballas because that is nothing more then an alliance so while the Families could return they could return with a different backstory with our with out a Grove Street being in the game.

 

As its been said over and over nothing is confirmed and we're all going off speculation and our own opinions but with a gang element going to be present in the game which is pretty much confirmed by having gang infested neighborhoods as well as a playable character involved in that, R* could just as easily use the gangs from SA and update them for V the same as creating new gangs. But why create new gangs when they already have gangs that already have names in people's eyes? Bloods and Crips are synonmous with LA and Ballas and Families are synanomous with Los Santos so R* could capitalize of having existing gangs just updating them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturnis
I'm done going back and forth. You'll believe what you want and I'll believe what I want. It still doesn't change the fact however you make no sense at all in your very flawed argument. With what you keep saying is similar to somebody saying well the Mafia couldn't be in IV because they were in III. The Mafia is an organization. Ballas and Families are organizations. The Families existed in SA prior to CJ and was stated to fdate back to the 70s so anything involving CJ and the Families does not have anything to do with the Families overall. R* could easily implement the Families and Ballas and not have to explain why they are there because they are gangs they are not characters and they are not focused around CJ. Thats what you're not understanding. CJ did not create the Families so if CJ never existed the Families still would have. The same with the Ballas so anything in SA is not detrimental to anything in V.

 

Like I said nothing is confirmed either way but there 's more evidence to back up this theory then anything you have said. Ballas on a bench in a main trailer as well as a suspected gang member being chased and wearing all purple. Not to mention 1 of the main characters is or was a gang member and has a fascination with green. You guys can say all you want but why would green and purple be prevelant for no reason? Why not have a black bandana covering your face since thats way more common then green. Pulling up quotes from Dan Houser that has absolutely nothing to do with this argument does not help you especially when it specifically details these are 2 different universes and the only things that dont transfer are characters. Your analogy with Spiderman and the Goblin is also the dumbest analogy I have ever seen and makes about as much sense as anything else you've said which equals not much.

fair enough you're entitled to you opinion like everyone else, but it will make more sense to you come spring time im sure. However, you bring up an interesting point though "With what you keep saying is similar to somebody saying well the Mafia couldn't be in IV because they were in III" were any organizations from gta3 in gta4? why not? We all know they are organizations and the gangs are based off of real life crime families, come on thats common sense, but you're looking at this way too realistically. Just because the bloods exist in real life doesn't mean that the ballas or grove street does. They are just representations, i fail to see how they truly do exist outside of SA. It's just a representation man, nothing more. Especially if he is (houser) trying to separate both worlds then it gives more credit to why they were just that, a part of that world only. nothing more. The analogy i gave makes perfect sense, you can't take out one thing from another world and put it into a completely different world (ignoring landmarks because R* wants to use them, its their game so whatever)

 

if what you're saying is to be believed then why aren't the Colombian Cartel, uptown yardies, diablos, forelli family, leone family all in gta 4? they are all representations of real life gangs (some) in liberty city (or whatever city) bloods and crips exist outside of just L.A. That's just its origin state, just like mafia organizations and other exist outside of any other city, Chicago comes to mind. gta4 is in liberty city, why aren't they around? this is your argument (and dont say because claude took them out lol). It comes down to because that was claude's representation of it, same thing with Tommy, and CJ. There is a reason why things in gta 1 is different from its 3 other ps2 offspring.

For 1 none of those gangs you mentioned from III are in IV because in most cases they wouldn't fit. The Colombian Cartel wasn't in IV but alot of representation of real factors in the criminal underground in NYC weren't incorparated into 4.The Forelli and Leone Family didn't exist in 4 because they obviously couldn't or else the whole seperate universe wouldn't make sense. The Yardies in a sense did return they just weren't called the Uptown Yardies. But the Mafia is a umbrella for various families. The Families and Ballas are umbrellas for various gangs. Just like in real life the various sets of Bloods and Crips are their own gangs they are just aligned under the Blood or Crip name. Thats why the Families could bein the game or Ballas because that is nothing more then an alliance so while the Families could return they could return with a different backstory with our with out a Grove Street being in the game.

 

As its been said over and over nothing is confirmed and we're all going off speculation and our own opinions but with a gang element going to be present in the game which is pretty much confirmed by having gang infested neighborhoods as well as a playable character involved in that, R* could just as easily use the gangs from SA and update them for V the same as creating new gangs. But why create new gangs when they already have gangs that already have names in people's eyes? Bloods and Crips are synonmous with LA and Ballas and Families are synanomous with Los Santos so R* could capitalize of having existing gangs just updating them.

exactly it wouldn't make sense, and the yardies was a completely different representation of them. I understand they are umbrellas i get all that. If this was the case then a sort of mafia umbrella should have been in gta4, but it would just be dumb. R* isn't going to go down the same road twice, this won't be heavily influenced on gangs or anything of that sort, they already said they want to give the user a different new experience and bringing in the same representations from SA just contradicts what they are trying to do with this, it distorts their vision for gta5.

 

The gang element is not confirmed at all, a simple sentence dialogue and some colors is not confirmation. However, i do believe gangs will obviously be around because that is the foundation of gta, it just won't be the same thing twice, R* hasn't done it before and there is no reason to sugest that they will here. I do agree though, i like the old eras and would welcome a return, it would be dope no question. It's just unfortunately R* doesn't want that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Killerdude
the part where micheal meets franklin you can read ballas on the bench but i dont think theres any chance of them coming back

I saw that too. Pretty sure it'll just be like one of those graffiti references from IV with the old protag names.

^This.

 

More then likely the case.

 

Also, don't you remember? In San Andreas we wiped out the Vagos and Ballas, there shouldn't be any left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Death2Drugs

I'll just say this:

Brands made sense to exist in both the IV and III era worlds. Now, remember that the Grove Street Families and Ballas are parodies of various LA street gangs. If we were to follow Rockstar's logic, it might make sense for the Grove Street Families and the Ballas to exist in the IV world, because they are parodies of "brands". Therefore, it makes perfect sense to see the GSF and Ballas. Wouldn't bet my money though, it's not confirmed yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marabunta Grande

user posted image

This shot was taken just before the shot below:

user posted image.

 

I doubt why Rockstar will show us two different shots of two different people wearing purple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saturnis
I'll just say this:

Brands made sense to exist in both the IV and III era worlds. Now, remember that the Grove Street Families and Ballas are parodies of various LA street gangs. If we were to follow Rockstar's logic, it might make sense for the Grove Street Families and the Ballas to exist in the IV world, because they are parodies of "brands". Therefore, it makes perfect sense to see the GSF and Ballas. Wouldn't bet my money though, it's not confirmed yet.

Ammu-nation is a brand that was skipped over in gta4 and made a return in 5. not every brand gets carried over or reused. Plus R* has never recycled gangs either, so i would be curious to see why they needed to here. Although i have a funny feeling i won't be asking why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Magic_Al

 

I have to agree with this sentiment. At this point, we know CJ is definitely NOT in the game, so there's that. These gangs have literally no reason to return - kind of like the mob families from III not being in IV - because Rockstar are crafting a completely new world with new criminal organizations and empires. While I don't doubt it would be nice for nostalgia for maybe a little while, but eventually I'd get over it and just say "hey, I had more than enough fun killing Ballas in 2004, I think I'm done with these guys."

 

The graffiti, for my money, definitely says Ballas though. I just don't think it's anything more than an easter egg like this in IV:

I'd sure like to know what the formula is for knowing when something we can see in the game world is not something the characters can see. Granted, they're probably not aware of mission markers floating over the ground. But I like to think realistic looking things that appear realistically are "real" in the world.

 

There's a very good reason for Grove Street Families and Ballas to still exist: a fictionalized L.A. needs stand-ins for the Crips and Bloods and why should Rockstar come up with a different placeholder identity for something that fills exactly the same role? If they can retain the same fictional corporations, radio personalities, etc., they can retain the same fictional gangs. By the way, the Los Santos Police Department is still there too.

 

There's also the issue of colors. Green and purple seem to have been used in GTA SA on the advice that it would be inflammatory to use the actual blue and red colors of the actual gangs. So, again, if they want to have stand-ins for these colors, their choices are kind of limited and green and purple are still the best choices for contrast and wearability compared to, say, yellow or orange or pink. The fake gangs end up with the same colors as in GTA SA almost by default. So use the same names. Why not? This is no different than Cluckin' Bell coming back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dick Justice

f*ck the Ballas. f*ck the Grove Street Families. I want new and original gangs in V. Things like the little scribblings on the bench are cool little references, but they're nothing more than that. An artwork of El Burro was shown as graffiti in the second IV trailer, yet neither he nor the Diablos returned in that game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ANT_P1989

WOW Y'ALL ARE IDIOTS WHEN IT COMES TO THE 3D ERA VS THE HD ERA.

 

I'll explain in FULL DETAIL how this whole Gang thing works in the two GTA  Eras. The STATE of San Andreas can exist in any era because it's a BRAND. The city of Los Santos can exist in any era because it's also a BRAND. San Andreas=California and Los Santos=Los Angeles The Families are THE GANG known for wearing GREEN. The Ballas are THE GANG known for wearing PURPLE. Gangs in the two eras are BRANDS. So that means they can exist in each era. Grove Street, Temple Drive and Serville Boulevard are SETS from the FAMILIES GANG. They CAN NOT return because they aren't a BRAND, they're just a SUB GROUP from a MAIN BRAND (The Families). Rollin' Heights, Temple Drive, Kilo Trays and the Front Yards are SETS from the BALLAS GANG. Those SETS can not return in the HD era because they aren't BRANDS, they're also SUB GROUPS from the BRAND (Ballas). The Ballas and The Families are the EQUIVALENT BRANDS to Los Santos, San Andreas as The Bloods and The Crips are EQUIVALENT BRANDS to Los Angeles, California.

 

So both Franklin and Lamar could very well be from THE FAMILIES but their SET is going to be different from the 3D era set. They could be from a newer set, for example: East Side Ganton Families, West Side Ganton Families, 102nd Street Families, etc. etc. BUT Franklin is moving on from the Gang Life. Lamar is trapped in that Bangin' mindset, trying to pull Frank back into it. That's why you saw Franklin with a GREEN BANDANNA over his face. There's only ONE GANG known for sporting green rags and that's FAMILIES. They were chasing a man wearing purple street clothes BUT he had NO RAG hanging or across his face so he is therefore an ASSUMED Ballas gang member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 2 Users Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 2 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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