Pretty sure we won't fly any Jumbos

[ChocoFrosty]

I was sort of thinking the same. Take a look at this screenshot for example.

 

http://www.thegtaplace.com/images/gtav/scr...michael_054.jpg

 

Notice how the door and windows just appear to just be part of the plane texture with little detail.

I was thinking the same thing when I watched the trailer.

 

But now I can't remember, did bigger jets in SA have noticeably defined doors and/or windows?

[YukiEiri]

But then you could argue that the jumbo jet in SA was too big for the map. Let's be honest, it probably was. But the map here is HUGE. I can see it being relative.

 

Also:

http://media.gtanet.com/gallery/gta-5-scre...122412_1280.jpg

Cutscene?

I'd love to fly that big plane but .. to be honest, it would'nt make any sense..

 

So I'm on the "no big planes" camp.

Why would there be a cut scene where Trevor jacks, flies, and lands a massive plane that allows for no player interaction whatsoever? That's just asinine. Of course you're going to be in control of that plane at some point... at least for that particular mission.

OK, I learned new word "asinine", thank you for that.

 

But back to the topic;

Well mission... We do stuff and get into a plane (like in SA), we kill people inside the plane (like in SA), then we get cutscene (like in SA) and so on so forth..

[GTAfan786]

You could fly a 747 boeing in SA, so why in the heck not in GTA V? Considering the huge size of the map.

[willbreeze]

You don't know nothing, why act like its a certainty?

[YukiEiri]

You could fly a 747 boeing in SA, so why in the heck not in GTA V? Considering the huge size of the map.

Yeah you could if you mod one into it..

I'd say that in vanilla SA you got 737 at the best..

[SkylineGTRFreak]

 

I was sort of thinking the same. Take a look at this screenshot for example.

 

 

Notice how the door and windows just appear to just be part of the plane texture with little detail.

this

 

you nailed it man.

 

Notice the wheels. They use the generic vehicle tire and rim texture. In IV, the wheels were just textured along with the main fuselage. I think they will be flyable. I just don't see any sense in having flyable aircraft at one side and unflyable, indestroyable planes on the other side.

 

 

EDIT:

 

Also notice the landing gear hatches. In IV, they were pretty much like they are in real life. And here? It looks like it#s one hatch per gear, all opened by 90 degrees for easy controlled movement. If it was a static object, I say it'd have more (realistic) gear hatches

Edited April 30, 2013 by SkylineGTRFreak

[Tupiz]

Airspeeds weren't realistic in SA so that explains pretty much everything. Don't know about V then, it's kinda hard to fly it 800km/h around the map.

[Rented]

Map too short.

 

 

Are you feeling all right? I would go to a doctor and get my self checked if i was you

[Hotband]

Obvious troll is obvious.

[MARKUS.]

 

I was sort of thinking the same. Take a look at this screenshot for example.

 

 

Notice how the door and windows just appear to just be part of the plane texture with little detail.

It was my thought too, maybe you can fly a cargo plane like the Andromada but not a passenger plane...

[stee_vo]

"Map too short"

 

 

 

Confirmed troll.

[carl turtle]

''Map too short''

 

WTF???

 

[Buffalo Soldier]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

[kill4food]

I really hope we can fly huge planes, i was looking forward to that. And i don't think it would make any sense to not be able to drive all planes. The map is by far big enough.

[Kifflom112]

To be honest I wouldn't care if we couldn't fly jumbo jets. We already can fly large military carrier jets, private jets, fighter jets, and smaller planes. I don't really care anymore but it would be a plus if we could fly those jumbo jets.

They're appearing to just be props that move though, probably fly around the map, take off, land, and do it all over again.

[blakeney]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

SA had one?

[Ryder 556]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Have you ever played San Andreas? Or read this thread? The only reason GTA IV didn't have any planes was because the map is too damn small. R* have said so.

[ForumName]

Just ask yourself:

Why would they NOT make them flyable?

 

If you can't pilot/drive anything vehicle that you can see I will be very disappointed.

[ChocoFrosty]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought about that. It makes total sense now why there weren't planes in IV.

 

I never bought all that "the map is too small- only one airport" BS. If there were AI jumbo jets flying around the map, then R* could have at least included a Dodo or something (which would probably be slower than an Annihilator anyway).

 

I guess they didn't want stupid people making videos of themselves crashing planes in to a copy of the Empire State Building. I can understand that, but they should've just said that's why.

[ChocoFrosty]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Have you ever played San Andreas? Or read this thread? The only reason GTA IV didn't have any planes was because the map is too damn small. R* have said so.

Yeah, but no, because think about it: even Vice City Stories had 2 planes. And IV is definitely bigger than VC. And they both only have one airport.

[Ryder 556]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought about that. It makes total sense now why there weren't planes in IV.

 

I never bought all that "the map is too small- only one airport" BS. If there were AI jumbo jets flying around the map, then R* could have at least included a Dodo or something (which would probably be slower than an Annihilator anyway).

 

I guess they didn't want stupid people making videos of themselves crashing planes in to a copy of the Empire State Building. I can understand that, but they should've just said that's why.

People have made videos like that in San Andreas. People will do it again in V. So why does V have planes if it'll just lead to building bombing practice simulations?

[ChocoFrosty]

 

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought about that. It makes total sense now why there weren't planes in IV.

 

I never bought all that "the map is too small- only one airport" BS. If there were AI jumbo jets flying around the map, then R* could have at least included a Dodo or something (which would probably be slower than an Annihilator anyway).

 

I guess they didn't want stupid people making videos of themselves crashing planes in to a copy of the Empire State Building. I can understand that, but they should've just said that's why.

People have made videos like that in San Andreas. People will do it again in V. So why does V have planes if it'll just lead to building bombing practice simulations?

It would be much more offensive to see a fan-made video recreating 9/11 in a city that looks very much like NYC and has many similar landmarks.

[kill4food]

Just ask yourself:

Why would they NOT make them flyable?

 

If you can't pilot/drive anything vehicle that you can see I will be very disappointed.

this is so true. rockstar obviously knows we will be disappointed if we can't fly them.

[Ryder 556]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought about that. It makes total sense now why there weren't planes in IV.

 

I never bought all that "the map is too small- only one airport" BS. If there were AI jumbo jets flying around the map, then R* could have at least included a Dodo or something (which would probably be slower than an Annihilator anyway).

 

I guess they didn't want stupid people making videos of themselves crashing planes in to a copy of the Empire State Building. I can understand that, but they should've just said that's why.

People have made videos like that in San Andreas. People will do it again in V. So why does V have planes if it'll just lead to building bombing practice simulations?

It would be much more offensive to see a fan-made video recreating 9/11 in a city that looks very much like NYC and has many similar landmarks.

Still. It's going to happen no matter where R* set a GTA game. The point I'm trying to make is that, while 9/11 has effected GTA in the past, it probably didn't change anything in the decision to not have flyable planes in GTA IV.

 

And you'd think that with all the things added in TBoGT, flyable planes would be one of them. What with parachutes making a comeback and whatnot.

[stee_vo]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought about that. It makes total sense now why there weren't planes in IV.

 

I never bought all that "the map is too small- only one airport" BS. If there were AI jumbo jets flying around the map, then R* could have at least included a Dodo or something (which would probably be slower than an Annihilator anyway).

 

I guess they didn't want stupid people making videos of themselves crashing planes in to a copy of the Empire State Building. I can understand that, but they should've just said that's why.

People have made videos like that in San Andreas. People will do it again in V. So why does V have planes if it'll just lead to building bombing practice simulations?

It would be much more offensive to see a fan-made video recreating 9/11 in a city that looks very much like NYC and has many similar landmarks.

I fly into buildings all the time with planes in Just Cause 2 and no one seems to give a sh*t.... How weird!

[ChocoFrosty]

 

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought about that. It makes total sense now why there weren't planes in IV.

 

I never bought all that "the map is too small- only one airport" BS. If there were AI jumbo jets flying around the map, then R* could have at least included a Dodo or something (which would probably be slower than an Annihilator anyway).

 

I guess they didn't want stupid people making videos of themselves crashing planes in to a copy of the Empire State Building. I can understand that, but they should've just said that's why.

People have made videos like that in San Andreas. People will do it again in V. So why does V have planes if it'll just lead to building bombing practice simulations?

It would be much more offensive to see a fan-made video recreating 9/11 in a city that looks very much like NYC and has many similar landmarks.

Still. It's going to happen no matter where R* set a GTA game. The point I'm trying to make is that, while 9/11 has effected GTA in the past, it probably didn't change anything in the decision to not have flyable planes in GTA IV.

 

And you'd think that with all the things added in TBoGT, flyable planes would be one of them. What with parachutes making a comeback and whatnot.

I just don't see any reason, other than 9/11 or laziness, why they wouldn't have included a small plane or two.

 

To me, it had to be one or the other. I mean, vanilla IV (which I love) only really had 3 easily accesible helicopters. I think they were just going for a more serious tone in IV and had put so much time and most of their focus into developing the game on a new engine/platform that they didn't have the desire or time to include a bunch of fun, bonus stuff (which explains the somewhat limited vehicle list, etc).

[woozie92]

I think thats just a mission, sadly

[Revolution-XW]

I was sort of thinking the same. Take a look at this screenshot for example.

 

 

Notice how the door and windows just appear to just be part of the plane texture with little detail.

I guess so, it does look unenterable.

 

I dont know why this thread didn't get locked based on the OP.

 

 

 

[Homemade Dynamite]

Map too short.

 

LOL

 

You're so funny.

 

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

[SkylineGTRFreak]

I honestly don't think we're ever going to get a GTA game where we can just fly a huge passenger airline, we probably would of had this by now had it not been for 9/11.

 

And now here we are, 5 years on from GTA IV in a completely new city and Rockstar are still to piss scared to give us the ability to fly a plane.

Wow, I can't believe I never thought about that. It makes total sense now why there weren't planes in IV.

 

I never bought all that "the map is too small- only one airport" BS. If there were AI jumbo jets flying around the map, then R* could have at least included a Dodo or something (which would probably be slower than an Annihilator anyway).

 

I guess they didn't want stupid people making videos of themselves crashing planes in to a copy of the Empire State Building. I can understand that, but they should've just said that's why.

People have made videos like that in San Andreas. People will do it again in V. So why does V have planes if it'll just lead to building bombing practice simulations?

It would be much more offensive to see a fan-made video recreating 9/11 in a city that looks very much like NYC and has many similar landmarks.

Still. It's going to happen no matter where R* set a GTA game. The point I'm trying to make is that, while 9/11 has effected GTA in the past, it probably didn't change anything in the decision to not have flyable planes in GTA IV.

 

And you'd think that with all the things added in TBoGT, flyable planes would be one of them. What with parachutes making a comeback and whatnot.

I just don't see any reason, other than 9/11 or laziness, why they wouldn't have included a small plane or two.

 

To me, it had to be one or the other. I mean, vanilla IV (which I love) only really had 3 easily accesible helicopters. I think they were just going for a more serious tone in IV and had put so much time and most of their focus into developing the game on a new engine/platform that they didn't have the desire or time to include a bunch of fun, bonus stuff (which explains the somewhat limited vehicle list, etc).

If you scan through the handling files you will find "Androm", "Fighter" and "Dodo" Handling lines. So I do believe they intended to put in planes first but removed them before the final build. And I don't believe it wa due to 9/11. In SA we had the Andromada and AT400 and San Fierro contained many skyscrapers aswell. Maybe they also had problems with planes and the /back then) new engine... Who knows?