Rockstar working on a Next-Gen Game (Apr. 2014 - Mar. 2015)

[BLOOD]

Here is an article (with Predictions and Facts) by The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/discussion/p/3p83a

[Mista J]

So their guess is as good as ours. "GTA V on next gen, Agent, sequal, or something else."

[acmilano]

It could probably be Agent. I would not be surprised at all if Sony re-announced Agent at E3.

This probably,they are delaying it for a long time.

[countrymike84]

GTA VI?

[Rock Howard]

I'd love for this to be true, but I highly doubt this is the case.

[Mista J]

It is true though.

[Rock Howard]

Heh. Wrong thread. I meant to post that in the "RDR to PC" topic.

[GTA3Rockstar]

GTA VI?

 

Definitely not.

 

GTAs come out every 4-6 years. Not less than one.

[Coin]

My educated guess is on it being GTA V ported to current gen.

 

It would be nice to see an Agent reveal but it seems as if it is dead in the water now. Trademark renewals mean very little these days.

 

I don't think I could contain myself if it were Bully 2, but that seems the least likely scenario.

[Daz]

Of course you're picking out tiny details that annoyed you slightly to justify why the games are bad. Clunky walking animation? 5 second Cutscenes when skinning animals? Just deal with it, 3D era games had their minor faults too. You're also suggesting that only recent R* games have annoyances to make the game more realistic. Funny that, because the gang wars in SA were about 5x more annoying than the phone calls in IV.

 

My point was just saying that most 3d era GTA's stories were mediocre, and most people didn't play them to get attached to the storytelling. I didn't see how that was so hard to understand.

 

And is think it's pretty clear I'm not a Rockstar fanboy like you suggested. I made it clear I didn't like certain elements from the 3D era in previous statements. I'm just saying I appreciate the HD era a whole lot more. To me, the story in RDR was remarkable. Same could be said about GTA IV. Do you actually think 3D era GTA's (SA in particular) had a better story than RDR? Not trying to offend anyone here, just curious.

I didn't exactly love the plot or dialog in that many games, however the missions and cutscenes were not forced upon you and you could discover storyline at your own pace and choice.

 

A storyline in a game might be difficult to win me over, but I just can't take anyone seriously when they say something like RDR or IV's story was the best out of any game they have played, which some people do. Including a really awesome driven storyline in a free roam game is relatively impossible to do right, because the next time you pick up that storyline might be another 15 hours of gameplay time which waters the whole experience down. The story never stands out for me, but what does stand out is f*cking terrible plot points, such as the whole lame as f*ck ending to RDR and Niko's f*cking mopey/whiney attitude in IV.

 

Don't get story missions mixed up with when I say story, or plot. Gameplay wise, V's missions were at least somewhat varied and fun as opposed to RDR or IV, but the actual content of the dialog and overall plot was f*cking terrible.

 

The so called "clunky animation" is not a fact, it's an opinion, so yeah, he does in fact have to deal with it. Many people are fine with it, many people are used to it, you don't see any other people coming out and hating something trivial as this. If anything, the 3d era animations were the "clunkiest" because there was barely any physics in it like IV/V, but who cares. It didn't matter then nor does it still matter now.

How is that an 'opinion'? That is a f*cking stupid thing to say.

 

Ragdolling and falling on your ass every two seconds is funny, sure. But if you actually want to get ANYTHING done the game becomes tedious as sh*t. Niko is so sluggish it is like trying to steer the f*cking titanic. The sheer fact you have to aim a firearm in order to get precice movement, for example if you wanted to stand in a very specific spot, indicates it is a f*cking outdated and stupid control setup. Forcing us to walk for no f*cking reason, even in RDR where there was basically like 3 f*cking interiors and no reason to walk. Their awful additions to character animations holds back any kind of gameplay you need to get done. In nearly any other game you could do the same thing and do it 2 or 3 times faster. Over time that sh*t gets f*cking old and annoying.

 

How the f*ck is any of this trivial? Playing a game for 500 hours, these little annoyances become pretty f*cking huge. That is what nobody understands because people who don't know what I am talking about are the type of people that play the story and never pick the game up again, maybe on an occasional weeked. Completely casual players. If you have played any of the Rockstar titles this generation for any extended period of time you would know exactly what I mean, but you obviously don't.

 

I played all those games day in day out for months and it shows what kind of gameplay is f*cking irritating or not. What is replayable and what is actually always fun.

 

The amount of times I have bitched about the phone calls in GTAOnline will more than likely be more than your post count. You don't know f*ck all about it. I don't want to list everything because that is not what this topic is about.

 

The fact remains regardless of anyone's opinion on if it is good or bad, if you like it or not, that it will be more of the same. Unless they finally decide to give you constant movement and aiming. (Max Payne 3 had it right, it was just a shame the rest of the game other than the gameplay ruined it entirely.) It will be 2020 and we will still have Rockstar titles with auto aim and not even any kind of dual analog movement and aiming with no dedicated crosshair. They really need to get up to f*cking date with their gameplay mechanics.

 

There are people that want you to have to fill up your tank with gas in GTA and create some sort of simulation with filters and intense graphics. And then there are people that just wan't a fun unrestricted gameplay experience for a laugh, even if that means sacraficing some realistic illusions put in place.

 

I am the latter.

 

It should always be gameplay over realism.

Edited May 15, 2014 by Daz

[OnceAgainYoungFitzpatrick]

Why are you always so angry? Every post I read of yours and you're cussing as much as a drunken sailor. Relax.

Edited May 15, 2014 by OnceAgainYoungFitzpatrick

[Daz]

I am relaxed as anything mate.

 

I am just passionate about what I care about.

[The Odyssey]

 

Yes I'm serious. And this goes for most games. If I can get use to it, you should be able to as well.

 

 

Getting used to something that's sh*t isn't the answer, fixing it is.

The walking animation in IV was f*cking awful, and is something I complained about often even during the games prime.

Climbing, walking, and running felt almost like you was doing it in a bubble underwater. It was slow and often unresponsive to the smaller touch.

 

Holy f*ck, I never said they shouldn't fix it.

 

Besides, some people like those animations. I don't think a Tommy Vercetti sprint would fit into a game like GTA IV.

Edited May 15, 2014 by The Odyssey

[Daz]

You are too hung up on the actual visual animation. What we mean is the result of said animation, causing gameplay to be unavailable while that animation is carried out because there is not the ability to cancel it mid way through. Like with skinning animals in RDR.

 

That is why it is annoying. You lose control of your character for the sake of an animation that I would rather not have.

 

We have to have an animation to take our phones out to take a 'snap' in GTAV, instead of just giving us the ability to screencap what is going on which would be so much f*cking easier.

 

Anyway, my point is, realistic features are often not a good idea, unless you are purposely trying to make a simulation.

[Algonquin Assassin]

 

Agent seems to a likely bet IMO. I've always felt that it would be their first next gen game.

 

If it is in fact Agent then we might have another multiplatform game on our hands. Since they did develop it for the PS3 originally, I think it's fair to say this is expected.

Yeah I think so.

 

GTA V being ported to next gen would be expected as well, but I hope that's not what it is as that would be kind of a buzzkill.

 

Hopefully it's a new game all together.

[ArcadeWilliamz]

My money will be on Red Dead 3.

[Mr. Scratch]

I for one am rooting for a new Lemmings. Because that game was the sh*t.

[Lock n' Stock]

Why is it that Rockstar can only release one game a year these days? I remember they used to get at least 2-4 titles out in any given year.

 

That said though, I hope it's Manhunt 3.

[iNero]

I'd love for this to be true, but I highly doubt this is the case.

 

What to be true?

It is confirmed that R* works on a Next Gen Project.

Those Info come from their financial call directly from the Take-2 President.

[Hmmm nice bike]

Why is it that Rockstar can only release one game a year these days? I remember they used to get at least 2-4 titles out in any given year.

 

That said though, I hope it's Manhunt 3.

Probably a number of reasons. From what I understand, the RAGE engine was a pain to work with, especially for the artists, some things would take longer to render, and I suppose they just want to make sure they release something that's got good enough quality to be out on the market instead of rushing it. Development of their last few games has been overall more time-consuming than in games they did 10 years ago.

 

Manhunt 3 or a reboot of Manhunt would be amazing, although I wonder how much they'd be able to get away with given the fact that the games were incredibly gory and violent even on the PS2, so just imagine what it'd be like on next gen. They probably worry about how much it'd sell, too, given that the sales of Manhunt 2 were apparently poor.

[Frantz Fuchs]

Are people seriously saying GTA 6?

 

I'm 80% sure it's a GTA V port. R* have long marketing times and don't release a game 8 months after an announcement. Maybe it could be Agent at best. GTA 6, RDR3 are definitely out of question.

[Mr. Scratch]

Does anyone remember this?

 

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/07/08/rockstar-toronto-developing-large-scale-next-gen-open-world-game/

[Zancudo]

It's likely pertaining the next Bully game. Which I wouldn't expect before 2016, since they must have started to work on this open-world project after Max Payne 3. But who knows.

Edited May 15, 2014 by Zancudo

[iNero]

Does anyone remember this?

 

http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/07/08/rockstar-toronto-developing-large-scale-next-gen-open-world-game/

 

Could also be, that R* Toronto worked on a GTA5 Port for quite a while.

I dont know if they are really making another Open World IP.

[Mr. Scratch]

It could be Bully, Red Dead or Agent. Maybe even Midnight Club.

[iNero]

It could be Bully, Red Dead or Agent. Maybe even Midnight Club.

 

The article mentions that San Diego is developing a new Open World game. Presumably Red Dead.

So Red Dead is out. I guess.

[Mr. Scratch]

It seems feasible enough, I mean it has been 4 years since the last one.

[dannyz]

 

Does anyone remember this?http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2013/07/08/rockstar-toronto-developing-large-scale-next-gen-open-world-game/

 

Could also be, that R* Toronto worked on a GTA5 Port for quite a while.

I dont know if they are really making another Open World IP.

Didn't the team that worked on Bully merge with Toronto?

I would go out and get a ps4 if it was RDR3/Bully2/Agent or unlikely a MH3. I hope it's one of those.

[A.O.D.88]

Come on guys how in the world is Rockstar ever going to make a Next-Gen title when the company is 120% dedicated and focused on x360 and ps3 GTAOnline mode?

 

They are so obsessed with that I don't even think they have any Next Gen plans right now.

 

That billion dollars went straight to their heads and ballooned their egos and scrambled their brains!

Edited May 15, 2014 by A.O.D.88

[Mr. Scratch]

That billion dollars is currently paying for their cloud servers.