R* Please make GTA 6 an empire building game

[Bat1]

Ok, so I've layed out in another thread how I think R* should develop a loose sequel to RDR set in prohibitionist Chicago and surrounding countryside.
Now I've been thinking about how to revolutionize the GTA franchise, and it involves an idea that has actually been suggested by a lot of fans and journalists.

That idea is this: EMPIRE BUILDING.

Ok, so we all know that GTA follows a narrative of rags to riches. Niko/Franklin/whoever starts as a low level enforcer, rises through the ranks, makes contacts, enemies and a ton of money along the way. We get nicer clothes, fancier property and more luxury. V took this farther than ever by letting us own property and do some side missions. This is a good step, but it really ends up being a side activity.

 

My idea is to take that mechanic and make it the soul of the games story. You start with one protagonist, (lets call him the king pin) getting caught up in a small gang of some kind. After the game opens and you do all the early tutorially missions with that gang, something goes sideways and you end up taking over. Now you're the leader of the gang, making money from their jobs which you set up. Think about the Assassins Creed Brotherhood, how you recruit assassins and send them on missions.

 

But once you take over the gang, the story missions move on to other stuff. You meet a new contact from another group. Maybe instead of a street gang its an MC this time. Now, the new contact isn't just a contact, he becomes a second protagonist with his own set of missions which intertwine with the first protagonists, just like in 5. You work with them for a while, and eventually sign them over to work for you. Now the MC is working for you too, you're splitting the profits of their missions with them. You've now got to protagonists, the kingpin and the president of the MC. Now you move on to something else, maybe you buy a mechanic and start running car thieves. There's a third protagonist introduced that handles all of that and reports to the kingpin. Then you incorporate a meth cook (new protagonist) and his dealers, or a casino, or an arms dealer, whatever. As the game progresses, you rise to be the most powerful crime lord in the city.

 

Now, from the narrative perspective, that builds tension because you're playing progressively more complicated odds, juggling bigger jobs and power. You can play the white collar criminal in the suit, but if you want a taste of something else, switch characters and you're running outlaw bikers through the desert, or boosting cars in the hood. You get to experience the underworld from all angles, top and bottom.

I can see the number of factions and protagonists getting out of hand, but I think that R* could be ambitious and go for 5 playable characters: the first protagonist who becomes basically the kingpin, car thief, MC president, head drug dealing, and casino dealer off the top of my head. You don't get them all at once, so it's not overwhelming. It also gives you the opportunity for different mixes, maybe the main protag and one or two of the others on a mission. Naturally the end might incorporate a huge gang war where the kingpin calls on all the factions to take over the city. R8* could even do another multiple choice ending where the protags can choose to team up fight for the kingpin, or try to take each other out and take over.

 

Add into that side properties like theaters, bars, golf courses and the like, and you could really spend and make money on a grand scale while taking over the city. Now maybe instead of just rolling up and buying a business, you have to use one of your gangs to muscle out the rival faction that owns it, then you get to purchase it. Bigger businesses belong to tougher crime lords which translates into tougher missions. As the story progresses you go from warring with street gangs to trading car bombs with the mafia and so on. R* could even go so far as to include a map that shows neighborhood by neighborhood which factions and gangs control which parts of the map. Now you're not just playing missions for random NPCs, you are running your own crime empire and organizing a full on gang war. You're basically playing Grand Theft Auto of Thrones.

 

This might all sound over the top, but lets remember that R* has next gen to work with now. I think there's no reason the can't take it to this level, so at the end of GTA 6 you can say "I own this city" and know it's true.

Edited May 9, 2014 by Bat1

[BLOOD]

I have never played Vice City (2002) but wasnt it an Empire Building GTA game?

[Detective Phelps]

I have never played Vice City (2002) but wasnt it an Empire Building GTA game?

Nope. Vice City Stories was, though (sort of).

 

The OP has some good ideas.

[Drunken Cowboy]

It's really hard to do well...

Games like Godfather and Vice City Stories have dabbled in it. It's hard to make a street criminal who believably gets stuck doing the grunt work and shoot outs on his own but is also the big cheese in charge of everything.

Something didn't sit right when the president of a motorcycle club hundreds strong had to be the one to steal bikes and oversee drug deals.

Or when Miami's coke lord delivers pizzas, advertise porn, and drive around glam metal stars.

 

I much more prefer playing as a nobody and staying a nobody.For one, like we were saying a couple threads back, the city feels much bigger when you're a nobody. When you take taxis and public trans as opposed to flying private jets and parachuting out of them consequence free.

Also, it's a realistic simulation of crime. Niko and Johnny didn't get out, they both had unhappy endings. They had rag-tag weapons you had to make the best of. They dressed like regular folk and it was a fun challenge story and gameplay wise trying to make things work.

 

And honesty, f*ck luxury and glam. I'm done with that sh*t so much after V. I don't play video games so I can pretend I'm a bigshot and brag about my virtual Bugatti. I play video games to feel and experience an environment, a character, and have fun while doing it. If you want a realistic and fun crime game, then we really need to stop all this f*cking suit/tennis/golf/supercar bullsh*t.

[AnDReJ98]

Even if it would be hard (like Drunken Cowboy said), it would be great. I enjoyed it more than SA/TLaD's gang wars and VC's simpler business system. There is a mod that adds VCS's empire building system into SA, and it was great, you could have both empire & gang war system.

[rovert]

I thought OP is talking about an empire like the romans and/or greek or something.

[Don Jimmz]

 

I have never played Vice City (2002) but wasnt it an Empire Building GTA game?

 

Nope. Vice City Stories was, though (sort of).

 

The OP has some good ideas.

You did build something of an empire in VC, acquiring properties and doing missions for them to generate revenue

[Bat1]

 

And honesty, f*ck luxury and glam. I'm done with that sh*t so much after V. I don't play video games so I can pretend I'm a bigshot and brag about my virtual Bugatti. I play video games to feel and experience an environment, a character, and have fun while doing it. If you want a realistic and fun crime game, then we really need to stop all this f*cking suit/tennis/golf/supercar bullsh*t.

I actually agree with this part to a great extent. I feel like 5, and online to an even greater degree are starting to cater to twelve year olds who have seen too many rap videos and not enough gangster films.

 

In truth, what I picture is just good old fashion white collar crime. Like, when Nikko moves up he wears suits, lives in nicer neighborhoods, but it still maintains a sense of realism. Also, in my mind, to make something like this work, you'd need protagonists who flesh out at all levels of the economic/luxury ladder. Maybe one protagonist turns into a horse track owner, but another is still on a lower level just trying to make ends meet (I'm thinking of Sons of Anarchy here, power but not abundant wealth.) The idea is to open as many different atmosphere's and experiences to the player as possible Nobody wants to be any one thing all the time.

[Midnightz]

OP: That's what Vice City, San Andreas, and V did - just with less characters. You engage in every level of crime, get involved with different criminal organizations, eventually overthrow everyone, and accrue assets.

[Tycek]

I wonder where you can actually find that in V. Another person making V what it really isn't.

[Th3MaN1]

I have never played Vice City (2002) but wasnt it an Empire Building GTA game?

You never played Vice City?

[Bat1]

OP: That's what Vice City, San Andreas, and V did - just with less characters. You engage in every level of crime, get involved with different criminal organizations, eventually overthrow everyone, and accrue assets.

Of course, but you don't control them. You don't have any mechanic like heist planning in 5 but for the greater criminal politics.

[Midnightz]

Do you mean: You can't initiate/decide what to participate in or not to participate in?

[D- Ice]

It's really hard to do well...

Games like Godfather and Vice City Stories have dabbled in it. It's hard to make a street criminal who believably gets stuck doing the grunt work and shoot outs on his own but is also the big cheese in charge of everything.

Something didn't sit right when the president of a motorcycle club hundreds strong had to be the one to steal bikes and oversee drug deals.

Or when Miami's coke lord delivers pizzas, advertise porn, and drive around glam metal stars.

 

I much more prefer playing as a nobody and staying a nobody.For one, like we were saying a couple threads back, the city feels much bigger when you're a nobody. When you take taxis and public trans as opposed to flying private jets and parachuting out of them consequence free.

Also, it's a realistic simulation of crime. Niko and Johnny didn't get out, they both had unhappy endings. They had rag-tag weapons you had to make the best of. They dressed like regular folk and it was a fun challenge story and gameplay wise trying to make things work.

 

And honesty, f*ck luxury and glam. I'm done with that sh*t so much after V. I don't play video games so I can pretend I'm a bigshot and brag about my virtual Bugatti. I play video games to feel and experience an environment, a character, and have fun while doing it. If you want a realistic and fun crime game, then we really need to stop all this f*cking suit/tennis/golf/supercar bullsh*t.

Some excellent points there mate. I have also had enough with the bullsh*t ridiculousness in V. Not so much because it was overly luxurious, but more because it was completely unrelated to crime. I play GTA as a crime-themed game, not a sims about the ridiculously over-glamourised life of a criminal, playing tennis with his wife etc...

 

I do completely agree with you that the entire rags-to-riches progression in GTA games has been terribly made, with missions completely uncompatible with the supposed heirarchical level of our protagonist on the ladder of crime. Another example is in VCS when Victor was a criminal kingpin, owning several empire sites, you get missions to kill drug dealers etc... yourself. In free-raom, you still have to attack businesses yourself - your gang is the only gang in the entire city who either refuse and/or are inherently unable to do any attacks on rival gang empire sites.

However, I would disagree that we should completely do away with empire building. I think there are still ways to do it properly.

 

I would also argue that the best way to see just how big the city and the criminal enterprises in it are, is to climb the ladder of crime, discovering new bigger criminal organisations and more powerful bosses you'll have to work for. If you were a lowly street thug, all you'll see is other thugs and the organised crime racket bosses hiring you. But, were you to progress to a racket boss yourself, running your own business, there would be a brief moment when you think you're top dog, only for a moment later to discover that you are now taking orders yourself from organised crime syndicate bosses. You later become the head of an organised crime syndicate, and you finally think you are your own boss now. Only, you soon discover you're taking orders from politicians, and foreign and domestic intelligent working for governments and more powerful criminal organisations.

 

Empire building also adds a much needed strategic aspect to the game - I am personally really tired of just relying on my shooting skills to finish the game. It also adds replay value to the game - something recent GTA games have been terrible at IMO. I've finished the storyline missions in V and there's virtually nothing for me toplay the game for. I've even given up on the 'Strangers and Freaks' missions after only completing a few, and now can't be bothered to even attempt the rest.

 

Finally, empire building would allow mini-games related to crime - a great break from the completely unrelated side-missions in most recent GTA games like IV and V.

 

You raise a very true and interesting dilemma regarding how the life of crime bosses is more strategic and planning than actually taking part in the adranaline-fuelled action. I personally think this is perhaps best solved by the game The Godfather 2. Becoming a crminal boss allows you to engage in stragetic planning of developing your empire, but you also have the option to take part in the action if you wish. Rising up the ranks would simply open up new strategic options, rather than force you to use them and abandon doing things yourself. When you become the boss of a criminal organisation, you'll gain the options of ordering hits on rivals, attacks on businesses etc... You can do it on your own, hire people to help you, or hire people to do everything while you watch.

Another great ideo is to allow you to control the people you hire. So if you hire a hitman to kill a rival, you can just just send him, with a predetermined chance of success. Alternatively, you can take control of the hitman, and do the hit yourself, with a greater chance of success (depending on how good you play GTA). You can even go to the place the hit is going to take place and watch the man you hired do the job,perhaps even helping himout.

 

IMO that way you can have both the realism of becoming a strategist when you become a criminal boss, but without depriving you of the action. Also, when you become a boss of a criminal syndicate, you'll constantly have new things to deal with - attacks on businesses, hits on you and your crew, etc. - so you will be forced to outsource some of the action to other people anyway if you don't want to be constantly rushing back and forth dealing with everythng yourself (and probably stillcoming short of dealing with every problem).

[killdrivetheftvehicle]

...

 

 

I would also argue that the best way to see just how big the city and the criminal enterprises in it are, is to climb the ladder of crime, discovering new bigger criminal organisations and more powerful bosses you'll have to work for. If you were a lowly street thug, all you'll see is other thugs and the organised crime racket bosses hiring you. But, were you to progress to a racket boss yourself, running your own business, there would be a brief moment when you think you're top dog, only for a moment later to discover that you are now taking orders yourself from organised crime syndicate bosses. You later become the head of an organised crime syndicate, and you finally think you are your own boss now. Only, you soon discover you're taking orders from politicians, and foreign and domestic intelligent working for governments and more powerful criminal organisations.

 

Empire building also adds a much needed strategic aspect to the game - I am personally really tired of just relying on my shooting skills to finish the game. It also adds replay value to the game - something recent GTA games have been terrible at IMO. I've finished the storyline missions in V and there's virtually nothing for me toplay the game for. I've even given up on the 'Strangers and Freaks' missions after only completing a few, and now can't be bothered to even attempt the rest.

 

Finally, empire building would allow mini-games related to crime - a great break from the completely unrelated side-missions in most recent GTA games like IV and V.

 

You raise a very true and interesting dilemma regarding how the life of crime bosses is more strategic and planning than actually taking part in the adranaline-fuelled action. I personally think this is perhaps best solved by the game The Godfather 2. Becoming a crminal boss allows you to engage in stragetic planning of developing your empire, but you also have the option to take part in the action if you wish. Rising up the ranks would simply open up new strategic options, rather than force you to use them and abandon doing things yourself. When you become the boss of a criminal organisation, you'll gain the options of ordering hits on rivals, attacks on businesses etc... You can do it on your own, hire people to help you, or hire people to do everything while you watch.

Another great ideo is to allow you to control the people you hire. So if you hire a hitman to kill a rival, you can just just send him, with a predetermined chance of success. Alternatively, you can take control of the hitman, and do the hit yourself, with a greater chance of success (depending on how good you play GTA). You can even go to the place the hit is going to take place and watch the man you hired do the job,perhaps even helping himout.

 

IMO that way you can have both the realism of becoming a strategist when you become a criminal boss, but without depriving you of the action. Also, when you become a boss of a criminal syndicate, you'll constantly have new things to deal with - attacks on businesses, hits on you and your crew, etc. - so you will be forced to outsource some of the action to other people anyway if you don't want to be constantly rushing back and forth dealing with everythng yourself (and probably stillcoming short of dealing with every problem).

 

Great Ideas, but the hierarchy of organized crime is also to prevent from being associated to the actual crimes, i.e. not getting hands dirty, so idea to foresee something or assisting is a thing of a lower level gangster boss, not the head of an organization.

 

Godfather 2 was a great game, but was unrealistic, because it retained the actions of the enforcer, while being the boss. Sure Vito killed a few guys in GF2 movie, but that happened when he was young and the organization was small. Michael was young as a boss too, but the organization was bigger, so he didn't have time to do any dirty work, and was trying to look legitimate, like all long time bosses. ( You need political backing when you are a big organization, and politicians want to look good too. If they would be known to back criminals they wouldn't be politicians for long.)

 

OT: I would like GTA 6 to be an empire building game. Just not exactly as OP suggests. Rather I would have it my way (see my sig)

[D- Ice]

 

...

 

 

I would also argue that the best way to see just how big the city and the criminal enterprises in it are, is to climb the ladder of crime, discovering new bigger criminal organisations and more powerful bosses you'll have to work for. If you were a lowly street thug, all you'll see is other thugs and the organised crime racket bosses hiring you. But, were you to progress to a racket boss yourself, running your own business, there would be a brief moment when you think you're top dog, only for a moment later to discover that you are now taking orders yourself from organised crime syndicate bosses. You later become the head of an organised crime syndicate, and you finally think you are your own boss now. Only, you soon discover you're taking orders from politicians, and foreign and domestic intelligent working for governments and more powerful criminal organisations.

 

Empire building also adds a much needed strategic aspect to the game - I am personally really tired of just relying on my shooting skills to finish the game. It also adds replay value to the game - something recent GTA games have been terrible at IMO. I've finished the storyline missions in V and there's virtually nothing for me toplay the game for. I've even given up on the 'Strangers and Freaks' missions after only completing a few, and now can't be bothered to even attempt the rest.

 

Finally, empire building would allow mini-games related to crime - a great break from the completely unrelated side-missions in most recent GTA games like IV and V.

 

You raise a very true and interesting dilemma regarding how the life of crime bosses is more strategic and planning than actually taking part in the adranaline-fuelled action. I personally think this is perhaps best solved by the game The Godfather 2. Becoming a crminal boss allows you to engage in stragetic planning of developing your empire, but you also have the option to take part in the action if you wish. Rising up the ranks would simply open up new strategic options, rather than force you to use them and abandon doing things yourself. When you become the boss of a criminal organisation, you'll gain the options of ordering hits on rivals, attacks on businesses etc... You can do it on your own, hire people to help you, or hire people to do everything while you watch.

Another great ideo is to allow you to control the people you hire. So if you hire a hitman to kill a rival, you can just just send him, with a predetermined chance of success. Alternatively, you can take control of the hitman, and do the hit yourself, with a greater chance of success (depending on how good you play GTA). You can even go to the place the hit is going to take place and watch the man you hired do the job,perhaps even helping himout.

 

IMO that way you can have both the realism of becoming a strategist when you become a criminal boss, but without depriving you of the action. Also, when you become a boss of a criminal syndicate, you'll constantly have new things to deal with - attacks on businesses, hits on you and your crew, etc. - so you will be forced to outsource some of the action to other people anyway if you don't want to be constantly rushing back and forth dealing with everythng yourself (and probably stillcoming short of dealing with every problem).

 

Great Ideas, but the hierarchy of organized crime is also to prevent from being associated to the actual crimes, i.e. not getting hands dirty, so idea to foresee something or assisting is a thing of a lower level gangster boss, not the head of an organization.

 

Godfather 2 was a great game, but was unrealistic, because it retained the actions of the enforcer, while being the boss. Sure Vito killed a few guys in GF2 movie, but that happened when he was young and the organization was small. Michael was young as a boss too, but the organization was bigger, so he didn't have time to do any dirty work, and was trying to look legitimate, like all long time bosses. ( You need political backing when you are a big organization, and politicians want to look good too. If they would be known to back criminals they wouldn't be politicians for long.)

 

OT: I would like GTA 6 to be an empire building game. Just not exactly as OP suggests. Rather I would have it my way (see my sig)

 

What you said is very true. But I think, for the sake of gameplay, you should be allowed to switch back and forth, playing what you want, as much as you want. I'd hate the idea of becoming a crime boss and being prevented from doing any of the dirty work unless I load a previously saved game. For the sake of realism, we can have a system that gives you more heat (thus making your life more difficult in other aspects) when you go around committing crimes directly. It also isn'tcompletely unheard of for crime bosses to do some dirty work and middle-management of particular rackets alongside the top-level strategic planning.

 

I've had a quick look at your concept thread - I think your empire building proposals are deffinately what GTA needs. It is also one of the best done and most detailed I have ever seen. Just,like I said before, what if I become head honcho of a protection racket gang and feel up for a bit of baseball bat-using-window smashing, molotov-throwing, shop-owner-intimidating action? I think allowing you to partake in the action (with penalties) and/or control one of the thugs you send over would help in this.

 

Off-Topic: I really like your concept thread overall too. Much of the concepts of protection rackets were first developed by Bedouin tribes, and even the word 'Mafia' is based on the Arabic language. Since the earliest Sicilian Mafias were based on protection rackets, it is probably fair to say a significant amount of Mafia culture came from these Bedouin traditions, through the Umayyad invasion of Sicily. However, today there aren't really any Arab gangs in the US, especially Arabian ones. Also, Persians (the 'Tehrangeles gang') tend to be incredibly racist against Arabs, I doubt the two would ever work together. Also Persian gangs tend to be most heavily involved in drugs trade - especially smuggling heroine grown in Afghanistan, but also other drugs like hashish too. Just a few thoughts on an otherwise great concept thread.

Take care bro.

Edited May 14, 2014 by D- Ice

[XxX19Dude95XxX]

its been done maybe if we where like the second hand man to the boss (maybe you brother) who puts up with his bs kills you girlfriend or some one important to you because you not business first and then you are so sick of it you go to the cops to help take him down that would be some what newer help take down something you help built

[jp9865]

What about multiple cities? You start off in one as no body and build up your empire until the heat gets too much where you have to skip town, To another city where again you're a nobody. Until you take over it all. There's a fine line between being the most wanted man in the world and being the most powerful!

[Sussus Amongus]

OP ever heard of GTA Vice City Stories? On of the main ways to make money in that game was by building empires. Taking over enemy gangs empires and upgrading them.

[killdrivetheftvehicle]

@D-Ice: Thanks for your comments and glad you liked it. I did not know that arabs and persians were mutually exclusive when I originally wrote it. (Later on I came to know the difference though). for taking the time to read my concept through and commenting with such elaboration. I will make some changes in the concept.