GTA VI built your drug empire

[Uncoupledspy]

Like in vice city stories build your drug empire in becoming a drug lord in the drug business. Owning hotels, prostitution businesses, buying and selling drug products, establishing a corporation, companys to buy and sell. Underground network, blackmarket profits of owning guns, drugs and prostitutes. 

[Edward Nashton]

The 'build your own empire' gimmick has absolutely been done to death, absolutely, in open world games for at least the last ten years, whether it's a criminal empire or something along the lines of AC2 and Brotherhood etc., I'm honestly sick of all the micromanaging. One of my least favorite parts about RDR 2 is the gang camp management mechanics - and that's just the one camp. To imagine all of what you described in a map that is presumably going to be the size of a modern city, sorry, but... hell no LOL. Yes, more content would be nice, but if that content consists of constantly keeping a bunch of plates spinning, then forget it, I'd rather just have a well written straightforward crime story and a decent amount of side stuff to do at my leisure.  

 

The only two games that did the drug empire thing right IMO are GTA Vice City and Scarface:TWIY (and a lot of people didn't care much for Scarface). The games that followed that model drove it to the ground and made it completely bland and boring to the point where I don't want to see that at all anymore, no matter if it's promised to be the best of its kind - I'm done with that, thank you. Let's explore other facets of the criminal underworld, please. 

Edited August 3, 2019 by Edward Nashton

[Jabalous]

3 hours ago, Edward Nashton said:

The 'build your own empire' gimmick has absolutely been done to death, absolutely, in open world games for at least the last ten years, whether it's a criminal empire or something along the lines of AC2 and Brotherhood etc.

I agree. I am not feeling this 'build your own empire' storyline because, as you said, it's been done to death and can be considered a cliche at this point. Doesn't GTAO include 'building drug empires' paths for the players anyway? I'd prefer a well-written, linear story with new concepts instead of reusing overused concepts from the past. It's what R* does best, that is, interesting linear stories. Choices hidden in menus and micromanaging 'drug empire' puppets via a command window will feel repetitive after a while of experimentation. 

Edited August 3, 2019 by Jabalous

[GRANDHEIST]

it could be done great

you being Pablo Escobar type

 

Managing your empire could happen after storyline, something do in free roam

 

and if micromanaging becomes boring you could give the power to some goon of yours

and maybe you would have to choose wisely, cause the goon could steal the money/ take over

 

In online maybe you could order your people to deal drugs in certain area, if another player sets their people to deal drugs in the same area there would be conflict

 

Lot of it should be in person interaction and not through menus etc.

Something like setting up a drug deal with a rival drug lord could be intense (having to bring a backup etc.)

[Len Lfc]

14 hours ago, Jabalous said:

I agree. I am not feeling this 'build your own empire' storyline because, as you said, it's been done to death and can be considered a cliche at this point. Doesn't GTAO include 'building drug empires' paths for the players anyway? I'd prefer a well-written, linear story with new concepts instead of reusing overused concepts from the past. It's what R* does best, that is, interesting linear stories. Choices hidden in menus and micromanaging 'drug empire' puppets via a command window will feel repetitive after a while of experimentation. 

Personally, I actually disagree. Maybe I just haven't played those games. But that kind of game isn't something I've played since Vice City Stories, back in what, 2006? It's actually the theme I am most interested in. I do agree about wanting a good, well written linear story though. But just with a lot of choice involved. I know that might not be possible, and might contradict itself. But hey, it's possible for people two want two things at the same time, that are unable to exist together lol. In regards to the choices hidden in menus and micromanaging, I would just hope that that can be improved and done in a way that is actually good and fun. I'm not a fan of not wanting something because it was bad in the past. And prefer to think in terms of improving somethings weaknesses for the next iteration. I do think that the empire stuff in GTA Online could be them working things out for the future though. Although it's entirely possible that that's just for online. Which makes sense, if you want to give players options on what kind of criminal you want to be.

[GRANDHEIST]

24 minutes ago, Len Lfc said:

 I do agree about wanting a good, well written linear story though. 

It could work that the story is linear & something like epic linear "slums-to-riches" tale and by the end of it you have finally built your empire

and then after story free roam is managing the empire

[YamatheKreature47]

19 hours ago, Edward Nashton said:

The 'build your own empire' gimmick has absolutely been done to death, absolutely, in open world games for at least the last ten years

Expand on that. What games have done this? None that I've played, especially to the extent that your implying. The Godfather II had that, but that was over what ten years ago now? Mafia III which failed miserably. None of these did a good job at this feature. But Rockstar obviously has the potential. And it's not called a gimmick. 

[Edward Nashton]

9 hours ago, YamatheKreature47 said:

Expand on that. What games have done this? None that I've played, especially to the extent that your implying. 

Okay, off the top of my head, I'll name as many as I can think of. Ready. Set. Go!

The entire Saints Row series (four games), Godfather one and two, Mafia 3. If we're moving away from 'criminal' empires, AC 2, Brotherhood, Black Flag, never played Syndicate but it does indeed have that as well, Brutal Legend (a straight up RTS empire builder, ffs), Shadow of War. Bonus: Then there's the sibling of this particular gimmick I call the 'liberation' open world game, where the good faction liberates the map by taking over the bad faction, Far Cry 5 comes to mind but there's more - and before someone balks at the idea of games like Saints Row being similar to FC5, lets look at the gameplay mechanics: You take control of a stronghold, business, base etc. either by force or by purchasing it. It generates money and or resources, adds a chunk of the map to your territory or increases your power and influence throughout the game, and spawns friendly NPCs within your territory. In some cases you could upgrade these locations to get better resources or more money, spawn stronger NPCs, the whole shebang. Some of the above mentioned allow you to do missions via menus and also manage your resources, upgrades and funds. Not every game I mentioned has every single one of those features, but they have enough of them to varying degrees that they all feel the same eventually. It may not seem like much to you, but I think this gimmick 'sub-genre'  takes up an obnoxious amount of room within the Open World genre as a whole.

 

People are going to want to split hairs over this, but I have no real interest in debating. That's just my opinion, man.

[Jabalous]

It'd also feel repetitive and fake after a period of playing. Imagine you're the GTA version of Tony Montana living in a big mansion with guards, soldiers, dealers and hitmen under your command. It'd feel good at first until you realize that those men are AI puppets with no character depth or background story. They die, then they regenerate, and you can easily find men to hire and so on. They'd look the same, walk the same and maybe some of them will have no dialogue to say except a few sentences to respond to your commands. "Go and make this deal", "hit that rival gang", "control that territory"... and the cycle repeats like I'm in a top-down strategy game with no interesting characters that possess enough depth and dialogue for me to feel attached to them. Rob Nelson of R* has made a comment regarding this topic. It's quoted below.

 

Quote

 

GamesBeat: I really liked this game. I played all 105 missions. I had a colleague who felt like he wanted it to be more like Hitman 2, where you can go and do anything, tackle your target through many kinds of means. It seems to me that approach is not what you wanted to do or tried to do. Do you have a view on how you balanced this sort of directed story versus the openness of the world and the missions?

 

Nelson: I think all of us feel like we want to approach any situation, anything, in any way we want and have it be credible. But that’s a big, big challenge. To do that and have it feel — it’s a big world and a big story, and I think it needed to be a big world and a big story for what we set out to do. But yes, we explored a lot of different avenues early in development, like more procedural approaches to things. Hey, it’d be great if this camp could totally grow and you could hire people from towns and come back and add to your camp. We explored, at one point, if you could take anybody fishing that you wanted at any time.

 

But what that ended up doing was a very procedural-feeling game. You’d write a bit of dialogue, beta a bit of dialogue, and go and make these AI-type behaviors. It didn’t feel like you’re on a thing with Pearson and Bill, or you’re on a thing with Javier and John. It felt like you were on a thing with AI that just looked like those people, but they didn’t behave like those people.

 

Unfortunately there’s no procedural system yet that we’re happy enough with to make the worlds we make. Our worlds are handmade. Our artists will use certain procedural tools, but they’re all curated by the artists. It’s the same for the content we make. For it to make you feel anything, it has to be made by humans. It has to be written and designs and shot and acted and processed and put into place very carefully. For things that happen in the world, we have to very selectively know when they’re going to happen.

 

It would be great if this was all open, but people have to make this stuff happen at some point. It has to be scripted so that it all feels right. I don’t think there are procedural tools that will make it feel real.

 

 

Edited August 4, 2019 by Jabalous

[CrimsonFolo]

Trust me, systems like that do not function well in reality unless they have something special.

 

Scarface : The world is yours game had a similar mechanic but after the first few gang exterminations, it started to get too repetitive. Vice city stories was good for its time. Micromanaging an empire would likely be boring to do and upkeep in the long run

[GRANDHEIST]

3 minutes ago, Jabalous said:

It'd also feel repetitive and fake after a period of playing. Imagine you're the GTA version of Tony Montana living in a big mansion with guards, soldiers, dealers and hitmen under your command. It'd feel good at first until you realize that those men are AI puppets with no character depth or background story. They die, then they regenerate, and you can easily find men to hire and so on. They'd look the same, walk the same and maybe some of them will have no dialogue to say except a few sentences to respond to your commands. "Go and make this deal", "hit that rival gang", "control that territory"... and the cycle repeats like I'm in a top-down strategy game with no interesting characters that possess enough depth and dialogue for me to feel attached to them.

you seem to be assuming it would be like its done before and not fresh new take with eg. more depth than RDR2 camp interactions

 

It could be something ever changing, the threat of someone else taking over your empire looming all the time,

keeping an close eye on your people cause they could be undercover police,

some kind of loyalty system or bribing people to reveal the rats and then actually taking them into some desert to finish them

 

also heavy emphasis on this:

22 hours ago, GRANDHEIST said:

if micromanaging becomes boring you could give the power to some goon of yours

 

So, if drug empire ends up being the VI's new thing then it will surely have depth we havent seen before

[Jabalous]

I'd have no issue with an empire-building story where it's heavily scripted to make it believable and interesting, and not semi-open options to create an illusion that I'm controlling an army of faceless AI characters with no story background. what I'd accept is something like Redemption 2's camp system where certain interactions will open main and side missions, with cutscenes and characters that possess names, depth and lines of dialogue. No regenerative characters if they get killed and the story can branch according the choices we make. Basically it's like the story choices (A this or B this) that we have in Redemption 2, but more, so we also have C and D for example that could lead to a different ending. However, I'd still prefer a different kind of story than empire building as it's been done before many times. I'd take a story in which our protagonist is a small-time criminal with no influence or control, but maybe only a skilled hitman for hire. No drama and romance, only a skilled criminal on the street in a big, dangerous and bustling city. 

Edited August 4, 2019 by Jabalous

[GRANDHEIST]

real cartels do treat their people as expendable though...

[Jabalous]

2 minutes ago, GRANDHEIST said:

real cartels do treat their people as expendable though...

True, but I want to enjoy a well-executed a story with great presentation, moments and characters. Faceless, regenerative AI characters won't do the story good as Nelson himself said. R*'s stance is clear on this topic coming from him.

[GRANDHEIST]

32 minutes ago, Jabalous said:

True, but I want to enjoy a well-executed a story with great presentation, moments and characters. Faceless, regenerative AI characters won't do the story good as Nelson himself said. R*'s stance is clear on this topic coming from him.

Yeah, I was thinking managing empire would be after storyline

[GRANDHEIST]

4 minutes ago, Damien Scott said:

Empire building and 80's Vice City. I think you guys want a remake of GTA Vice City, not GTA VI.

add South American location there and its more like GTA Narcos

 

making the product there and then transferring it across the sea to Vice City that could be another element

[Jabalous]

If it's about modern-day cartels, drug managing and trafficking, then you'll not get a better setting than a re-imagined California-Arizona-New Mexico-Texas map, with border towns in the Mexican side. I actually would like such a setting, at least from an exploration, scenery and atmosphere point of view. Inspired by Breaking Bad? Even better! 

Edited August 4, 2019 by Jabalous