Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!   (85,031 visits to this link)

    2. News

    1. GTA Online

      1. Find Lobbies & Players
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Vehicles
      4. Content Creator
      5. Help & Support
    2. Crews

      1. Events
      2. Recruitment
    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA Next

    3. GTA V

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

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

    6. GTA Vice City Stories

    7. GTA Liberty City Stories

    8. GTA San Andreas

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

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

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

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    12. 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

    2. Red Dead Redemption

    3. 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. Forum Support

    2. Site Suggestions

Mister Pink

GTA: Return to It's Roots

Recommended Posts

Mister Pink

As stated earlier in the thread, the true roots of GTA is mindless killing and car chases, not immersive cities and compelling stories despite how well GTA does these 2 factors.

 

That's your personal opinion. GTA was those things you mention and notably Vice City for me and San Andreas were compelling stories and the cities we immersive from III. There was mindless killing and car chases but that was only part of it. You had hours of cutscenes with with all-star Hollywood casts. There wasn't anyone around the time of GTA III making city-based open-worlds. It was huge! I remember being told that if you beat someone up and ambulance would arrive. Then you could beat the ambulance men and steal the ambulance. Doesn't sound special now but that was crazy back then! It was unheard of. There was so much buzz and hype around it. Were you around at the time or old enough to remember? Maybe the story or the city's immersive quality didn't appeal to you back then.

 

Back to my point..

 

Doesn't take away from my main point that the 3D era gave us fresh locations and bounced between timelines, giving the look, fashion dramatic changes. Going from III to Vice City gave a stark change in styles of cars. There wasn't other open-world games to compare like there is now. So Rockstar owned those places. Now we have other open world games and Rockstar setting their own games in the same locations makes those locations not very unique.

 

Returning to roots, means for me, returning to a time when Rockstar gave us new cities and new timelines.

 

What are we going to get next? Modern day Vice City? How predictable, if so.

Edited by Mister Pink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Am Shaegar

There wasn't anyone around the time of GTA III making city-based open-worlds. It was huge!

 

Sorry to say, but that's not true. Mafia 1 was already in development since 1998 or so.

>> 10 Years On: Interview With Mafia Director Daniel Vavra <<

 

@topic

HD era is leaning towards more realism, heavy emphasis on storytelling, even if it means certain sacrifices on the gameplay (and content) front. From my experiences with GTA IV and V, a lot of the fun of 2D/3D GTA's has either been scrapped for realistic design and appeal, or kept reserved for multiplayer experiences to make it a great incentive for the boring single player experiences outside the story.

HD era is just taking the safe option of providing the most basic fun mechanics without taking any risks or evolving the single player experiences any further. Online could be the reason here, but in either way, GTA will not be same any more, that's for sure.

Additionally, there's a large crowd that seems to be favoring story so much over gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mister Pink

 

There wasn't anyone around the time of GTA III making city-based open-worlds. It was huge!

 

Sorry to say, but that's not true. Mafia 1 was already in development since 1998 or so.

>> 10 Years On: Interview With Mafia Director Daniel Vavra <<

 

@topic

HD era is leaning towards more realism, heavy emphasis on storytelling, even if it means certain sacrifices on the gameplay (and content) front. From my experiences with GTA IV and V, a lot of the fun of 2D/3D GTA's has either been scrapped for realistic design and appeal, or kept reserved for multiplayer experiences to make it a great incentive for the boring single player experiences outside the story.

HD era is just taking the safe option of providing the most basic fun mechanics without taking any risks or evolving the single player experiences any further. Online could be the reason here, but in either way, GTA will not be same any more, that's for sure.

Additionally, there's a large crowd that seems to be favoring story so much over gameplay.

 

 

Not, really. In this case, it doesn't matter when things are conceived or in development, what matters is when the gamer actually gets to play it. Mafia which was a story-focused game that didn't come out on consoles until 2004. By that time GTA III blew us away, Vice City was out nearly 2 years and San Andreas was due to release a few months later.

 

But I agree with the rest of your post and I love the story side of GTA. I just wish they will make a character's story that suits a wide range of criminal activities. I hope they just remember that what might seem great in a film, may not translate very well in to a videogame. Like Michael's family and him deceiving Trevor all this time. Yeah, that's an interesting story if it was a movie but I don't want to play as someone I can't respect or feel sympathy for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lioshenka

God, I'm glad I'm not the only one.

 

I'm OK with multiple protagonists, but 1 would be better. What I want to see back:

- multiple safe houses in different areas

- no autohealing

- restore the old STAR and bribe police system

- get rid of the silly weapon wheel. I want to switch my weapons fast

- make radio fun again, not even more depressing and realistic

- diverse landscape. Problem with GTA 5 was that even though it had the countryside, it was all hills. Nothing else.

- allow offline mode. Like offline, with no need for a constant internet connection.

- only use the phone to pick up the calls

- also display time and weapons in the corner, like in the good old days

- 2d colourful radar

 

These are small things... I mean GTA 4 was a total disaster, but if these little things were fixed in the next GTA I would be the happiest gamer alive.

 

I think GTA 3 had the most atmospheric setting, SA was the best out of all of them (it wasn't THE best, but given the wide range of music, vehicles, activities, landscpape and missions it definitely is the one R* should try and re-create). I remember walking to the Portland safehouse at night, people shouting, listening to Walkmen, steam coming out of mancovers, train wheels screeching in the distance, the sound of waves... Or going back to the hood in the sunset-lit Ganton, with homies chilling on the steps, air filled with heat... Never since I experienced the same level of satisfaction as then.

 

I recently sold my GTA 4 copy on eBay. Never before I sold anything GTA related. Every GTA that came out I bought it straight away. Now, with GTA 6 I will wait before deciding if it is right for me. I am horrified by admitting the fact that I may not even buy GTA 6 if R* approach doesn't change.

Edited by Lioshenka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Journey_95

While I agree with some points, I think just saying that they need to make 3D Era esque games again is a bit silly. People need to let go of nostalgia already. That feeling of going from GTA 3 to VC and then SA is never going to come back. Gaming has changed (VC came one year after GTA 3 and SA only 2 years after VC, no way anything like that would happen now), Rockstar has changed as well and overall experiences like that aren't replicated.

And while you may prefer those 3 and think they are the core of the series, not everyone agrees. Some think that GTA V is on SA level and brought fun back to the series (apparently). Or others think that VC and GTA IV were the best and most well crafted games (with no unnecessary filler) etc. Lots of different types of fans and Rockstar is never going to win all of them over.

 

You can't just go bigger all the time. GTA IV purposefully dialed back and didn't add even more cities because they knew it should be quality over quantity. It was a reboot of sorts. And GTA V is still SP focused, there was plenty of content in the original game. Only the SP DLC's were cancelled because of Online (which sucks of course). Sure the story was flawed but GTA was never known for its great stories before GTA IV anyway. Its not like its worse than SA...

 

New cities would be interesting but the HD versions of LC & LS are so different that I'm completely fine with remaking Vice City or even Las Venturas first. Its like exploring completely new cities again.

The only part I'm worried about is GTA Online and its effect on GTA6, apart from that sh*t, there is no identity crisis.

 

Also Lincoln was an unlikable dick. Vastly preferred Michael and Trevor & GTA V's story over that boring repetitive sh*t.

Edited by Journey_95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquamaniac

I think GTA should be all about cars in the first place, now some might tell me play Need for Speed or Taxi Rider but that's not the same.

 

Add firefighter and paramedic missons, taxi (missed it in IV) and vigilante, add trucker missions where you take and deliver goods over the entire map with full size trucks.

 

Be able to customize trucks, taxis and some select cars to police/vigilante cars.

 

If it does not fit to the main story add a game in the game, where you go to an computer and choose your identity, maybe any NPC model in the world, for example a fat chick or a constructions worker and play minigames as them, this would also allow various absurdities outside the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mister Pink

While I agree with some points, I think just saying that they need to make 3D Era esque games again is a bit silly..

 

While I agree with some of your points too, I think the one quoted is misrepresenting the fundamentals of my argument completely.

 

If I may be emphatic, I'm not saying move backwards on some nostalgia trip I'm saying move forward on a formula that was more appealing, fresh and newer at the time. A game set in Vice City in the 1980's in 2002 is more unique, more specialist, more original than a game set in contemporary settings released in the modern age when the video game market is much more saturated with open-world city-based games. In fact, it's the opposite of nostalgia. I'm striving for a fresh GTA, a new experience.

 

Open world city-based video games aren't anything new anymore. Setting a game in LA and ripping the piss out of pop culture, driving down the same L.A. streets in Midnight Club, San Andreas, L.A. Noire, True Crime: L.A. is just not as original as it was driving through L.A, in 2004 when open-word city games were a relatively new and exciting concept or Vice City in 2002.

 

My argument is not one against having a GTA in modern Miami. It's an argument for setting GTA in a new city, a city that hasn't been covered or has barely been covered before, like GTA III at the time or Vice City at the time or San Andreas at the time. That doesn't mean I'm arguing for a III-era GTA. It's a matter of principle. It's wanting something new, like those games were new back then.

 

A new city and perhaps a decade that isn't covered a lot by other media gives two massive foundations for a game that hasn't been made before or bears even a visual resemblance to another game.Take Vice City for example. Has anyone ever confused Vice City for another game before? It's so unique, stylistically, even though it borrows from everything else but nobody was making games like that.

 

I guess I preferred GTA when it was more specialized. It focussed more on crime, the underworld, and sub-cultures up until around San Andreas/GTA IV. I don't compare V to San Andreas at all, only that they share some basic geography in a setting. It claims to be satirizing Hollywood culture yet you have to experience all the sh*ttiness of Hollywood culture to do that like Fame or Shame, Yoga and other such drivel. It's all low-hanging fruit, mindless tripe that I can see opening a magazine or turning on the TV if I want. However Rockstar made a great step with V to bring back feature diversity and rewards which IV lacked. But, lack of SP focus, Shark Cards and the general casual gamer appeal of GTA V isn't for me.

 

One argues that HD re-imaginings are completely different. That's true but the city-feel is the stillt he same. Driving up to the L.A. observatory it's still the same obervatory, the pier down at the beach, I've all ready spent hours down there in Midnight Club: L.A and in San Andreas. It's nothing new or fresh playing in GTA V again. I'm all for re-imagining cities, maybe just wait a bit longer or something. I don't know.. I think it's better to try a new city. All those cities in the III era were pretty much new to everyone at the time and that's what's missing today.

 

It's like the hipster that says he like a band before they got big. But there's an element of truth to that. Often times when a game specializes in something more specific it's more appealing to a core group of individuals. Then, as it gets bigger there's more market demand the tendency it try to cater for larger markets, next thing you know, you used to be listening to funk, G-Funk and Depeche Mode or classic Vice City hits, doing coke deals and drive-bys and now your listening to Rhianna and Fergie worrying about your bratty family and going to therapy in a city you've driven through a billion times in other games and not only other games but Rockstar published games.

 

Give me gritty Baltimore, 1990's or Boston or Detroit. Give me a new city, a new time to explore, one that I don't see and live in every day all ready.

Edited by Mister Pink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Journey_95

 

While I agree with some points, I think just saying that they need to make 3D Era esque games again is a bit silly..

 

While I agree with some of your points too, I think the one quoted is misrepresenting the fundamentals of my argument completely.

 

If I may be emphatic, I'm not saying move backwards on some nostalgia trip I'm saying move forward on a formula that was more appealing, fresh and newer at the time. A game set in Vice City in the 1980's in 2002 is more unique, more specialist, more original than a game set in contemporary settings released in the modern age when the video game market is much more saturated with open-world city-based games. In fact, it's the opposite of nostalgia. I'm striving for a fresh GTA, a new experience.

 

Open world city-based video games aren't anything new anymore. Setting a game in LA and ripping the piss out of pop culture, driving down the same L.A. streets in Midnight Club, San Andreas, L.A. Noire, True Crime: L.A. is just not as original as it was driving through L.A, in 2004 when open-word city games were a relatively new and exciting concept or Vice City in 2002.

 

My argument is not one against having a GTA in modern Miami. It's an argument for setting GTA in a new city, a city that hasn't been covered or has barely been covered before, like GTA III at the time or Vice City at the time or San Andreas at the time. That doesn't mean I'm arguing for a III-era GTA. It's a matter of principle. It's wanting something new, like those games were new back then.

 

A new city and perhaps a decade that isn't covered a lot by other media gives two massive foundations for a game that hasn't been made before or bears even a visual resemblance to another game.Take Vice City for example. Has anyone ever confused Vice City for another game before? It's so unique, stylistically, even though it borrows from everything else but nobody was making games like that.

 

I guess I preferred GTA when it was more specialized. It focussed more on crime, the underworld, and sub-cultures up until around San Andreas/GTA IV. I don't compare V to San Andreas at all, only that they share some basic geography in a setting. It claims to be satirizing Hollywood culture yet you have to experience all the sh*ttiness of Hollywood culture to do that like Fame or Shame, Yoga and other such drivel. It's all low-hanging fruit, mindless tripe that I can see opening a magazine or turning on the TV if I want. However Rockstar made a great step with V to bring back feature diversity and rewards which IV lacked. But, lack of SP focus, Shark Cards and the general casual gamer appeal of GTA V isn't for me.

 

One argues that HD re-imaginings are completely different. That's true but the city-feel is the stillt he same. Driving up to the L.A. observatory it's still the same obervatory, the pier down at the beach, I've all ready spent hours down there in Midnight Club: L.A and in San Andreas. It's nothing new or fresh playing in GTA V again. I'm all for re-imagining cities, maybe just wait a bit longer or something. I don't know.. I think it's better to try a new city. All those cities in the III era were pretty much new to everyone at the time and that's what's missing today.

 

It's like the hipster that says he like a band before they got big. But there's an element of truth to that. Often times when a game specializes in something more specific it's more appealing to a core group of individuals. Then, as it gets bigger there's more market demand the tendency it try to cater for larger markets, next thing you know, you used to be listening to funk, G-Funk and Depeche Mode or classic Vice City hits, doing coke deals and drive-bys and now your listening to Rhianna and Fergie worrying about your bratty family and going to therapy in a city you've driven through a billion times in other games and not only other games but Rockstar published games.

 

Give me gritty Baltimore, 1990's or Boston or Detroit. Give me a new city, a new time to explore, one that I don't see and live in every day all ready.

 

You make valid points again. While I would be ok with giving VC, LV & SF the HD treatment first (although I would definitely prefer even then to go back in the past, 70's-80's LV & SF would be great for an example). getting a completely new city + a new time period is definitely very intriguing as well.

 

But to be honest, Rockstar was always out for more popular settings and appealing to larger markets, maybe it has increased now but its definitely not something that just came with the HD Era (if anything story wise GTA IV is the boldest GTA). I mean VC is basically a nostalgia trip to 80's Miami (an iconic well known Era) and SA also had the whole popular 90's gangbanging vibe in LA and then they even added the classic LV mob/casino setting.

 

I just don't see them doing a more unknown setting like Baltimore. I guess some sort of balance would be good, like before.

 

I definitely want them to focus more on the criminal underworld again in GTA VI though, that was very lacking in GTA V which revolved too much around the tedious corrupt government, typical Hollywood culture and paramilitary bs.

Edited by Journey_95

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RetroMystic

 

But to be honest, Rockstar was always out for more popular settings and appealing to many people, maybe it has increased now but its definitely not something that just came with the HD Era (if anything story wise GTA IV is the boldest GTA). I mean VC is basically a nostalgia trip to 80's Miami (an iconic well known Era) and SA also had the whole popular 90's gangbanging vibe in LA and then they even added the classic LV mob/casino setting.

 

The thing is, while New York can remain timeless in what sort of concepts you can throw at it and you can blow LA out of the water with a silly government plot with 'splosions guns and heists what's there with Miami?

 

The Cuban immigration plotline is far over, Scarface-esque plots have been done to death and (while as an Aussie I'm not entirely sure) to my knowledge drugs isn't a massive threat anymore like it was in the 80's. Like Mister Pink said the early 2000's were when open world games as a concept was still new and R* could get away with writing a loveletter to Scarface, Vice City now would have nothing going for it. I could see R* satirising the American south but that's about it. What else can you satirise?

 

I would like to believe that the writing team at Rockstar North would choose a setting that makes sense thematically for this day and age unless they did a period game which is far more unlikely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

 

 

But to be honest, Rockstar was always out for more popular settings and appealing to many people, maybe it has increased now but its definitely not something that just came with the HD Era (if anything story wise GTA IV is the boldest GTA). I mean VC is basically a nostalgia trip to 80's Miami (an iconic well known Era) and SA also had the whole popular 90's gangbanging vibe in LA and then they even added the classic LV mob/casino setting.

The thing is, while New York can remain timeless in what sort of concepts you can throw at it and you can blow LA out of the water with a silly government plot with 'splosions guns and heists what's there with Miami?

The Cuban immigration plotline is far over, Scarface-esque plots have been done to death and (while as an Aussie I'm not entirely sure) to my knowledge drugs isn't a massive threat anymore like it was in the 80's. Like Mister Pink said the early 2000's were when open world games as a concept was still new and R* could get away with writing a loveletter to Scarface, Vice City now would have nothing going for it. I could see R* satirising the American south but that's about it. What else can you satirise?

 

I would like to believe that the writing team at Rockstar North would choose a setting that makes sense thematically for this day and age unless they did a period game which is far more unlikely.

* Miami is like the LA of the East Coast. Even so more than ever, its awash with money, its a playground for the rich and famous, its a very important cultural, entertainment and media hub, an internationally renowned tourist destination, world-famous and symbolic for its image as a beautiful, sunny tropical metropolis. There is plenty to modern Miami as far as GTA material is concerned, plenty.

 

* Cuban immigrants or their descendants are not the only significant and interesting aspect of Miamis demographic. There is much, much more to Miami's people, culture, and society other than anything Cuban or Cuban-American.

 

* Drugs is still a massive threat and influence on crime in Miami, most definitely indeed, the city is still a major entry point for narcotics imported into the USA from Latin America and the Caribbean. Miami still has a very heavy presence of drug trafficking organisations, and local gangs that deal drugs, and the rough districts of city have very high rates of murder, shootings, gun crime, gang activity, street crime - most of it relating to the drug trade or drug addiction. Its just not as highly publicised as it was in the 1980s, its contained to the poorer and rougher neighbourhoods, and the citys powers that be brush these issues under the carpet to protect Miami's reputation as a popular tourist destination. But look further and you will see the truth, or watch The First 48 reality homicide detective cop show.

 

* I see you have followed Rockstars lead and caught the need for emphasis on satire bug in GTA. Satire, while traditionally always being a part of GTAs identity, has generally only played a very peripheral role on the sidelines. Its only with V that is has become of much more importance to the games main theme, and many critics will argue that its this stance that has very much led to the popular opinion that V represented a downward spiral in the quality of Rockstars writing and scripting. There is no essential need to focus on satire to make GTA very appealing and entertaining to its fans, its needs to be remembered that GTA is first and foremost a crime action game/simulator, not an interactive platform for social commentary. The III-era games typical represented a time when the focus in GTA was about straight up, hardcore and explosive criminal action and drama, laced with small tidbits of satire and slapstick humour for brief light moments of fun - but not drenching the whole theme deep in it.

 

For me, a new VC and South Florida setting calls, and this time I truly hope the series returns to its roots SP wise at least, along with much more.

Edited by Official General

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquamaniac

 

While I agree with some points, I think just saying that they need to make 3D Era esque games again is a bit silly..

 

While I agree with some of your points too, I think the one quoted is misrepresenting the fundamentals of my argument completely.

 

If I may be emphatic, I'm not saying move backwards on some nostalgia trip I'm saying move forward on a formula that was more appealing, fresh and newer at the time. A game set in Vice City in the 1980's in 2002 is more unique, more specialist, more original than a game set in contemporary settings released in the modern age when the video game market is much more saturated with open-world city-based games. In fact, it's the opposite of nostalgia. I'm striving for a fresh GTA, a new experience.

 

Open world city-based video games aren't anything new anymore. Setting a game in LA and ripping the piss out of pop culture, driving down the same L.A. streets in Midnight Club, San Andreas, L.A. Noire, True Crime: L.A. is just not as original as it was driving through L.A, in 2004 when open-word city games were a relatively new and exciting concept or Vice City in 2002.

 

My argument is not one against having a GTA in modern Miami. It's an argument for setting GTA in a new city, a city that hasn't been covered or has barely been covered before, like GTA III at the time or Vice City at the time or San Andreas at the time. That doesn't mean I'm arguing for a III-era GTA. It's a matter of principle. It's wanting something new, like those games were new back then.

 

A new city and perhaps a decade that isn't covered a lot by other media gives two massive foundations for a game that hasn't been made before or bears even a visual resemblance to another game.Take Vice City for example. Has anyone ever confused Vice City for another game before? It's so unique, stylistically, even though it borrows from everything else but nobody was making games like that.

 

I guess I preferred GTA when it was more specialized. It focussed more on crime, the underworld, and sub-cultures up until around San Andreas/GTA IV. I don't compare V to San Andreas at all, only that they share some basic geography in a setting. It claims to be satirizing Hollywood culture yet you have to experience all the sh*ttiness of Hollywood culture to do that like Fame or Shame, Yoga and other such drivel. It's all low-hanging fruit, mindless tripe that I can see opening a magazine or turning on the TV if I want. However Rockstar made a great step with V to bring back feature diversity and rewards which IV lacked. But, lack of SP focus, Shark Cards and the general casual gamer appeal of GTA V isn't for me.

 

One argues that HD re-imaginings are completely different. That's true but the city-feel is the stillt he same. Driving up to the L.A. observatory it's still the same obervatory, the pier down at the beach, I've all ready spent hours down there in Midnight Club: L.A and in San Andreas. It's nothing new or fresh playing in GTA V again. I'm all for re-imagining cities, maybe just wait a bit longer or something. I don't know.. I think it's better to try a new city. All those cities in the III era were pretty much new to everyone at the time and that's what's missing today.

 

It's like the hipster that says he like a band before they got big. But there's an element of truth to that. Often times when a game specializes in something more specific it's more appealing to a core group of individuals. Then, as it gets bigger there's more market demand the tendency it try to cater for larger markets, next thing you know, you used to be listening to funk, G-Funk and Depeche Mode or classic Vice City hits, doing coke deals and drive-bys and now your listening to Rhianna and Fergie worrying about your bratty family and going to therapy in a city you've driven through a billion times in other games and not only other games but Rockstar published games.

 

Give me gritty Baltimore, 1990's or Boston or Detroit. Give me a new city, a new time to explore, one that I don't see and live in every day all ready.

 

 

 

This is why I suggested Paris, France is a violent country, not in terms of gun violence as in the US, but riots in suburbs, burning cars, attacking police and the like. France also has its own pop culture, a large rap scene, good action-movies that could work as an inspiration. I am not biased in this manner, I have no ties to France but Paris is a city (unlike most other European destinations) that could actually work, GTA sells world wide and Paris is as famous as LA, Miami or New York but less stereotyped in movies and TV series. Another country has a whole different style of buildings and cars, after the rural landscape of GTA V they could focus on a more metropolitan landscape to turn back to more rural map in the US in GTA VII.

 

For me as a non-American a GTA in Miami would feel quite similar to LA, all about sun and beach, not that I have a problem with that but it would not be very inventive.

 

Scenarios in America I'd like and that were something new would be some midwestern scenario with towns like Chicago, Detroit or St. Louis or some Redneck Confederate State scenario, the later might be too special and too offensive and V actually had that partly, though not to the degree I wished.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Am Shaegar

I prefer a new city over another modern rendition of the previous settings, which going by their past track record of working on games like IV and V, it could likely result in another divisive split among the fans. New city brings much needed freshness in terms of experiencing something that we haven't in the series, and can also be good for a fresh start to drastically change the formula in terms of gameplay, and overall content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mister Pink

I prefer a new city over another modern rendition of the previous settings, which going by their past track record of working on games like IV and V, it could likely result in another divisive split among the fans. New city brings much needed freshness in terms of experiencing something that we haven't in the series, and can also be good for a fresh start to drastically change the formula in terms of gameplay, and overall content.

 

I agree completely. Offical General makes a Miami setting sound very appealing and I'm with him, it does... but I don't think it's enough change in the series, visually. Like Aquamaniac mentioned, it's not very inventive. Two blue-sky, sunny, bright, modern GTA's back to back over the course of quite probably 10 years, is 10 years playing in same looking environments. Not a chance. V is already making me think the series has gone super stale. Doing the same jig down in Miami won't cut it.

 

I think a new city, a city that a new fan and an old-skool fan can't say they've been there before, not only in a GTA but in any competitor game. Something fresh for us all. Like I keep saying, III was new at the time, San Fierro, Las Venturas.. they were open world games based in cities claimed, bagsied, snapped-up by Rockstar. Watch Dogs 2 has San Fierro locked down recently, I wouldn't go there purely for the fact that Ubisoft claimed it recently. I'm actually sick of L.A. Usually I want to go to a city GTA is set in after playing it but man.. L.A. is burned out.

 

I would try a grimy city like Baltimore, Detroit. Somewhere out of the sun for a while. Yeah, let's have sunny days but I'm craving somewhere that looks a bit grimier, sinister a bit, run-down, plenty of crime. Anywhere, just make it new. Let Rocksar, "Rockstarize" a city. Who knows, it might be a city you might have never been on your rada, but you can always trust Rockstar to make a decent world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

 

I prefer a new city over another modern rendition of the previous settings, which going by their past track record of working on games like IV and V, it could likely result in another divisive split among the fans. New city brings much needed freshness in terms of experiencing something that we haven't in the series, and can also be good for a fresh start to drastically change the formula in terms of gameplay, and overall content.

 

I agree completely. Offical General makes a Miami setting sound very appealing and I'm with him, it does... but I don't think it's enough change in the series, visually. Like Aquamaniac mentioned, it's not very inventive. Two blue-sky, sunny, bright, modern GTA's back to back over the course of quite probably 10 years, is 10 years playing in same looking environments. Not a chance. V is already making me think the series has gone super stale. Doing the same jig down in Miami won't cut it.

 

I think a new city, a city that a new fan and an old-skool fan can't say they've been there before, not only in a GTA but in any competitor game. Something fresh for us all. Like I keep saying, III was new at the time, San Fierro, Las Venturas.. they were open world games based in cities claimed, bagsied, snapped-up by Rockstar. Watch Dogs 2 has San Fierro locked down recently, I wouldn't go there purely for the fact that Ubisoft claimed it recently. I'm actually sick of L.A. Usually I want to go to a city GTA is set in after playing it but man.. L.A. is burned out.

 

I would try a grimy city like Baltimore, Detroit. Somewhere out of the sun for a while. Yeah, let's have sunny days but I'm craving somewhere that looks a bit grimier, sinister a bit, run-down, plenty of crime. Anywhere, just make it new. Let Rocksar, "Rockstarize" a city. Who knows, it might be a city you might have never been on your rada, but you can always trust Rockstar to make a decent world.

 

 

Glad you agree with me on some points :^:

 

I fully understand you want a brand-new setting for something fresh and inventive, but the locations you desire to see are pretty much highly unrealistic to never to gonna happen. Cities like Baltimore or Boston simply won't happen because they don't have that worldwide appeal or iconic status needed for an ideal GTA setting. Detroit with other Midwest cities like Chicago is a possibility indeed, yes, and I'd like to see that at some point.

 

Aquamaniac is having a laugh about Paris though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mister Pink
Posted (edited)

Yes, we agree on a few things :

 

However, I don't think GTA's success hinges on being set in cities with world-wide appeal. Yes, it helps as it's familiar to most people. But these cities had world-wide appeal mostly because they're homes to the biggest film industries, notably New York and L.A. There's a bunch of cities around the world and in the U.S. that have most things and more L.A. has. L.A. just seems to have worldwide appeal because of Hollywood lazily or perhaps conveniently shooting on it's doorstep.

 

As for Boston not having appeal? Well, we have huge films set there where Boston was very much a part of the fabric of the film; The Departed, Gone Baby Gone, The Fighter, Black Mass, The Town, Mystic River to name but a few. These are centred around crime and are all highly rated, critically acclaimed successful films known around the globe. I'm not sure how you are gauging a cities appeal. I'm basing mine on films, also quick searches on Google will find figures like over 7 million international travelers going through Boston airport, not including the 31 million domestic travelers that go through Boston. Source.

 

Let's look at Baltimore. Baltimore is the setting for HBO's The Wire. Whether you've seen it or not, it's rated at one of the most realistic TV shows, is rated highly by critics so much so that even the writer and creator of Black Mirror (Charlie Brooker) did

on why it's so good. The Wire's creator David Simon was an ex-writer for the Baltimore Sun and teamed up with an ex-cop to write the show and the ex-cop got all the inside details in what was originally going to be a book. The show is about Baltimore City as much as it is the institutions there. Like GTA, the city is like a character in itself. In The Wire, the Baltimore is a character too. It's not just the location it's set in. David Simon, the creator, touched on stuff so real to the system, the war of drugs and it's failure to police corruption, politics in corruption, he even had a sit-down with the then president Obama and
..

 

"According to a report by Variety, anonymous Emmy voters cited reasons such as the series' dense and multilayered plot, the grim subject matter, and the series' lack of connection with California, as it is set and filmed in Baltimore" - Wikipedia

 

Baltimore isn't postcard iconic. You might think Miami is iconic from things like Scarface (I don't know) but Baltimore is iconic from shows like The Wire. Maybe I'm putting too much emphasis on TV shows or films but they're generally a fantastic gateway to the believability of crime game set in a particular city. If a movie or a multi-season crime TV show can be set Baltimore or Detroit or Boston, it's a good indicator that a good GTA story can be set there. What does a GTA game need? Good source material. Is there the crime there? Is there a city? Is there buildings, cars and houses? Is there water? I only knew Miami through things like Scarface back in 2002 but I loved exploring it and discovering what Miami is through Rockstar's vision in Vice City. I can think of a bunch of great films, like the ones I listed that compliment Boston as a good backdrop. I only have The Wire of Baltimore but The Wire IS Baltimore, you don't need much else.

 

Boston map is practically begging to be made in to a GTA. Surprised nobody hopped on this sooner...Just look at it..

 

boston.gif

 

 

Did anyone think New Jersey was iconic? Not really but they made one of the most successful TV Shows, The Sopranos based on the Jersey Mob. The "6th" family. They were considered a laughing stock. If you can't get made in New York you go to Jersey. But good writing made it work.

 

Rockstar is bigger than the big movies now. Rockstar is it's own institution. Rockstar can make a place iconic, they don't need to follow "iconic"

Edited by Mister Pink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

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