Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    2. GTA VI

    3. GTA V

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

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Announcements

      1. GTANet 20th Anniversary
    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

How did the Lost MC become so b*tched over the years?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

 

I'm a fan of how they did Johnny's death so I like it that way :P. It's impactful and memorable in a way that just getting rid of a random gang wouldn't have been. 

Johnny could've been sent off in a much better way if he was Trevor's main antagonist and actually posed a big potential threat to him, in my opinion. His role in IV. TLaD and TBoGT was big enough for him to get a proper send-off instead of a quick cameo that hardly lasts for five minutes.

 

Off-Topic: Johnny's look in V feels retconned when compared to his base IV look.

Edited by H-G
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, H-G said:

Johnny could've been sent off in a much better way if he was Trevor's main antagonist and actually posed a big potential threat to him, in my opinion. His role in IV. TLaD and TBoGT was big enough for him to get a proper send-off instead of a quick cameo that hardly lasts for five minutes.

 

Off-Topic: Johnny's look in V feels retconned when compared to his base IV look.

 

To be fair it's literally one of (if not the) most memorable deaths in GTA. A traditional battle with The Lost ending with a shootout and him killed in a standoff or whatever wouldn't have been as surprising and unique. They did something different and unexpected with it and gave Johnny a memorable death and Trevor a memorable introduction, I liked it.

 

And yeah V (and Online) is pretty bad with recreating the looks of IV characters. Johnny's actually one of the better ones I think, Packie and Tony Prince are horrendous!

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having recently finished TLaD for the nth time, I still can't help but think that the Lost are pretty much finished by the end of the DLC, or at the very least the Alderney chapter is. And I highly doubt the LC chapter would be able to grow this strong to the point of literally annihilating the Angels of Death. It doesn't make any sense to me why the Lost have such a strong presence in Los Santos and Blaine County (despite being so weak) instead of the AoD when TLaD clearly shows us that they are the stronger gang and have a much bigger influence operating in both the East and the West coasts.

And since the AoD are so hateable, I wouldn't have minded killing them relentlessly as Trevor or the Online protagonist during missions. But at this point there's nothing that can be done to change what Rockstar did with the Lost in V. Our boys clearly deserved better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Legomanarthur said:

Having recently finished TLaD for the nth time, I still can't help but think that the Lost are pretty much finished by the end of the DLC, or at the very least the Alderney chapter is. And I highly doubt the LC chapter would be able to grow this strong to the point of literally annihilating the Angels of Death. It doesn't make any sense to me why the Lost have such a strong presence in Los Santos and Blaine County (despite being so weak) instead of the AoD when TLaD clearly shows us that they are the stronger gang and have a much bigger influence operating in both the East and the West coasts.

And since the AoD are so hateable, I wouldn't have minded killing them relentlessly as Trevor or the Online protagonist during missions. But at this point there's nothing that can be done to change what Rockstar did with the Lost in V. Our boys clearly deserved better.

 

Is it confirmed that The Lost was particularly strong in Los Santos/Blaine County? Seems like they just run a meth operation out of a trailer park and have a small clubhouse at the edge of the city. Could be AoD was already weak when they showed up, or was weakened by other gangs competing for drug dealing territory or whatever rather than just The Lost. And I wouldn't base anything on how strong either gang is during TLAD's time, as a lot can change in 5 years. I think with all the variables many scenarios are believeable.

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think as someone else pointed out, the IRL Hell's Angels aren't particularly strong in LA; I'd imagine the Angels of Death are probably operating out of San Fierro. Maybe they have a chapter in an unseen southern San Andreas county.

 

But they certainly couldn't have been "wiped out". Their leader is still alive by 2008.

 

It would be cool if the AoD were remade as cool bad guys whom you battle for drugs coming up north (opioids) and south (cocaine). They could be a rival faction. 

 

As for The Lost, I can't help but figure there's something else going on with their political situation. It almost feels as if they've merged with a West Coast chapter. It's just poorly explained. Surely it can't be everyone from LC. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

 

Is it confirmed that The Lost was particularly strong in Los Santos/Blaine County? Seems like they just run a meth operation out of a trailer park and have a small clubhouse at the edge of the city. Could be AoD was already weak when they showed up, or was weakened by other gangs competing for drug dealing territory or whatever rather than just The Lost. And I wouldn't base anything on how strong either gang is during TLAD's time, as a lot can change in 5 years. I think with all the variables many scenarios are believeable.

I mean, since they apparently wiped out the AoD from existence and remain the only biker gang in the region I would assume that there's more to them than meets the eye, especially if you consider Online as canon where they have quite a bit of resources with helicopters, armored vehicles and a seemingly infinite number of members, but that doesn't really count. However we're never told how the Lost got this "strong" between IV and V. We're just left to our own interpretation of what happened during those five years.

Things could change in five years, but the way TLaD ends makes it pretty clear to me that whatever remains of the Lost are the few surviving members of the Alderney chapter and the LC chapter, but that chapter is barely mentioned in the game unfortunately so we don't know how strong it is. Who knows, maybe they were dealt a severe blow after "Frosting on the Cake".

I personally can't see the Lost becoming this strong based on the way TLaD ended but Rockstar thought different so yeah...

 

I guess the AoD could've fallen from grace before V and Online but as far as I can remember they're never mentioned outside of that one encounter with a Lost member in single player claiming that they're a myth which is quite a bold statement in my opinion. To me it's clear that Rockstar chose to bring the Lost back in V purely for the fact that more people would recognize them and appreciate the references to TLaD (which is debatable I guess 😛). Unfortunately, it seems like they chose to completely ignore their own lore in the process or they actually forgot about what they had previously established with the AoD.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

To add on to this, Lester Arnold, the leader of the AoD, is not dead. In fact, he's mentioned in Chinatown Wars, so apparently, after the events of TLAD, the Angels of Death continued business in LC as usual, at least by 2009, if we consider CW canon to the HD universe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Idk it just seems like trivial details to me. We can connect the dots well enough to make it make sense for the purpose of the GTA V story. Too trivial for them to get into explaining in huge detail when it's such a minor part of the story.

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Idk it just seems like trivial details to me. We can connect the dots well enough to make it make sense for the purpose of the GTA V story. Too trivial for them to get into explaining in huge detail when it's such a minor part of the story.

 

I'm surprised Billie this seems out of character for you!

 

To me it's not trivial at all, in fact it feels borderline non-canon, which I think is what frustrates people most.

 

What was Rockstar's aim?:

 

  1. To show off Trevor's character it was necessary for him to kill off a protagonist from IV. Only Johnny fitted the bill. If this is the case then Johnny and the LMC are shoehorned in which is somewhat irksome. However, killing Johnny and the Lost, GTA's "good" biker gang, would really establish Trevor as the antiest of all anti-heros in GTA. Was this their intention?
  2. To show off Trevor's character he takes on and destroys a biker gang. Not believable of course, but it could have been the AoD. Ties in canonically (as the bigger west coast MC) and still establishes Trevor as a ridiculous one-man band. However, this may have portrayed Trevor as "good" destroying GTA's "nasty" biker gang. Rockstar really wanted Trevor to be evil and so this wouldn't have the same effect (killing a previously unknown AoD leader rather than a loved IV protagonist).
  3. Rockstar took the backlash to GTA IV took literally. As well as removing IV's physics (car and melee), introducing whacky missions from the start, killing off a IV protagonist was a message to the fans "we listened to you." Of course, most us felt "not like that you didn't".

 

All in all it just felt off. It felt un-GTA to have Trevor kill Johnny and it felt poor of Rockstar to spoil their own canon by having the Lost rather then the AoD. Trevor destroying an entire biker gang is ridiculous anyway.

 

I can only assume they wanted to establish Trevor's character and demonstrate they'd moved on from IV. The execution of, pardon the pun, of course, was poor, and 90% of GTA fans didn't like it. It's yet another reason why many of disliked V at the very beginning of the game, which doesn't happen usually.

Edited by Patrizio
Link to post
Share on other sites

You hit the nail on the head. It feels like Rockstar tried to push a sort of narrative without realizing it damaged the established canon. It created a lot of plot holes that only head canon can fix.

 

Who knows, maybe Rockstar will retcon the entire storyline, or just ignore the part altogether. Maybe we'll just see AoD and Lost members in 6 without any regard to the events of TLAD. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Patrizio said:

 

I'm surprised Billie this seems out of character for you!

 

To me it's not trivial at all, in fact it feels borderline non-canon, which I think is what frustrates people most.

 

What was Rockstar's aim?:

 

  1. To show off Trevor's character it was necessary for him to kill off a protagonist from IV. Only Johnny fitted the bill. If this is the case then Johnny and the LMC are shoehorned in which is somewhat irksome. However, killing Johnny and the Lost, GTA's "good" biker gang, would really establish Trevor as the antiest of all anti-heros in GTA. Was this their intention?
  2. To show off Trevor's character he takes on and destroys a biker gang. Not believable of course, but it could have been the AoD. Ties in canonically (as the bigger west coast MC) and still establishes Trevor as a ridiculous one-man band. However, this may have portrayed Trevor as "good" destroying GTA's "nasty" biker gang. Rockstar really wanted Trevor to be evil and so this wouldn't have the same effect (killing a previously unknown AoD leader rather than a loved IV protagonist).
  3. Rockstar took the backlash to GTA IV took literally. As well as removing IV's physics (car and melee), introducing whacky missions from the start, killing off a IV protagonist was a message to the fans "we listened to you." Of course, most us felt "not like that you didn't".

 

All in all it just felt off. It felt un-GTA to have Trevor kill Johnny and it felt poor of Rockstar to spoil their own canon by having the Lost rather then the AoD. Trevor destroying an entire biker gang is ridiculous anyway.

 

I can only assume they wanted to establish Trevor's character and demonstrate they'd moved on from IV. The execution of, pardon the pun, of course, was poor, and 90% of GTA fans didn't like it. It's yet another reason why many of disliked V at the very beginning of the game, which doesn't happen usually.

 

I care more about a memorable and impactful scene and them doing something surprising and different than trivial technical details about the timeline of a biker gang that plays a very minor role in the game. I couldn't care less about the AoD since they were never well developed as a gang/characters and it makes no difference to me if it's the "proper" biker gang that should be there, especially considering it takes place 5 years after IV and so much can change in that time. It's GTA V not TLAD part 2, they gave The Lost the appropriate amount of explanation for their small role in the game.

 

I don't think Johnny was shoehorned in, after things went to sh*t for him and that chapter of The Lost by the end of TLAD and Ashley was already established as his potential weakness it seems perfectly reasonable to me they'd end up going somewhere else and that this depressed outlaw biker with a drug addict girlfriend and drug dealers and users all around him could fall victim to drugs himself. It worked for me as in intro to Trevor, it showed how unhinged he could be (as well as establishing how badly Michael's faked death affected him), an interesting way to go with a protagonist, and the scene/mission was shocking and entertaining. I enjoy the novelty of getting to see what became of a previous protagonist (even if it's not a happy ending). It even increases my appreciation of TLAD and Johnny as a character overall, adding an extra tragic edge to that story and making Johnny's character arc more interesting, and proving the title "The Lost and Damned" to be brutally correct. Maybe killing Terry and Clay like random NPCs was a bit overkill but other than that I have no complaints about it.

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

Maybe killing Terry and Clay like random NPCs was a bit overkill but other than that I have no complaints about it.

This is the main thing I had issues with. Fast forward to the end of the game, barely any of the "antagonists" were worthy to be in that role, Trevor's big bad was the Chengs? Just because he pissed them off a little bit and they kidnapped Michael once in the entire story? No f*ck that!

 

Introduce Trevor, Kill Johnny, have Trevor confront Terry and Clay at Stab City but make it so they got away somehow and then have them as looming antagonists instead who have an actual reason to go after Trevor, who would've had an actual reason to track him down in Los Santos, who would've made sense to kidnap Michael to lure Trevor into a trap, etc. And then for the last missions you can have it so that Clubhouse in Los Santos is put to use instead and have Franklin take them out there instead, you'd barely have to change the damn mission BUT it'd give Trevor an actual antagonist and ones that wouldn't expect Franklin to roll up.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Ash_735 said:

This is the main thing I had issues with. Fast forward to the end of the game, barely any of the "antagonists" were worthy to be in that role, Trevor's big bad was the Chengs? Just because he pissed them off a little bit and they kidnapped Michael once in the entire story? No f*ck that!

 

Introduce Trevor, Kill Johnny, have Trevor confront Terry and Clay at Stab City but make it so they got away somehow and then have them as looming antagonists instead who have an actual reason to go after Trevor, who would've had an actual reason to track him down in Los Santos, who would've made sense to kidnap Michael to lure Trevor into a trap, etc. And then for the last missions you can have it so that Clubhouse in Los Santos is put to use instead and have Franklin take them out there instead, you'd barely have to change the damn mission BUT it'd give Trevor an actual antagonist and ones that wouldn't expect Franklin to roll up.

The antagonists in GTA V in general felt so cartoony that I couldn't understand.

 

Like, every GTA game before hand had some big bad villain that f*cked you over and was hyped up to the end (except LCS kinda), whereas in GTA V it's kinda all over the place.

 

I understand it's meant to be more light hearted, but don't make it inconsistent. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Afaik the general consensus is that R* didn't like TLAD, they were forced to make that episode by Take2 because there was a deal between T2 & Microsoft for an exclusive episode for the xbawks, that's why that game is so short (compared to TBOGT) because they pretty much hardly cared for it & that same reason is likely also why they killed off the guy like he was a little b*tch in 5, sending a message to M$ / T2 management.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, suicidal_banana said:

Afaik the general consensus is that R* didn't like TLAD, they were forced to make that episode by Take2 because there was a deal between T2 & Microsoft

Don't make up lies/spread lies. It was TBOGT that was changed, and that was due to "fan" backlash at IV/TLAD being "boring & depressing". There were no changes made by Microsoft or Take-Two.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ash_735 said:

Don't make up lies/spread lies. It was TBOGT that was changed, and that was due to "fan" backlash at IV/TLAD being "boring & depressing". There were no changes made by Microsoft or Take-Two.

 

I wonder if this is even confirmed? I feel like any time there's a claim that Rockstar said they didn't like something or did something because of fans it's made up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

 

I wonder if this is even confirmed? I feel like any time there's a claim that Rockstar said they didn't like something or did something because of fans it's made up.

It's never been outright confirmed but TBOGT features smaller changes to the main story beat already established in IV/TLAD such as both night clubs getting shut down for good, Tony going missing, the end location of the diamonds, etc.

 

TBOGT still tries to play some of these out but reverses them in the final act. E.g. the club's being shut down but having Yusef bail them out, Tony not going missing, only Bahama Mama's being shut down for good.

 

The diamonds ending up in the trash can at the end though is a change that still doesn't make sense to this day.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ash_735 said:

It's never been outright confirmed but TBOGT features smaller changes to the main story beat already established in IV/TLAD such as both night clubs getting shut down for good, Tony going missing, the end location of the diamonds, etc.

 

TBOGT still tries to play some of these out but reverses them in the final act. E.g. the club's being shut down but having Yusef bail them out, Tony not going missing, only Bahama Mama's being shut down for good.

 

The diamonds ending up in the trash can at the end though is a change that still doesn't make sense to this day.

 

I think those are just some slight inconsistencies in a very complicated plot, plus maybe them writing some of it as they went along, rather than changes. Like, there's nothing to indicate it was planned to be any different. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

 

I think those are just some slight inconsistencies in a very complicated plot, plus maybe them writing some of it as they went along, rather than changes. Like, there's nothing to indicate it was planned to be any different. 

The Diamonds was a change, the other two mission plotlines still play out exactly as they do in GTA IV (Heroin & Cocaine).

Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
47 minutes ago, Ash_735 said:

The Diamonds was a change, the other two mission plotlines still play out exactly as they do in GTA IV (Heroin & Cocaine).

 

Where does the info that it was a change come from though, just fan guessing or something more concrete? What was the original ending allegedly meant to have been? I could see them not having fully worked out exactly how they'd end the diamonds story from the start and instead working on it as they went. TBOGT ends later than IV or TLAD so they knew when doing the first two games that they still had plenty of time to finish the ending of the story. 

 

Other than that when there's three games set at the same time with a complicated web of several different plots running through them, and they weren't even all written/finished at the same time, it was just inevitable that some inconsistencies would happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, billiejoearmstrong8 said:

 

Where does the info that it was a change come from though, just fan guessing or something more concrete? What was the original ending allegedly meant to have been? I could see them not having fully worked out exactly how they'd end the diamonds story from the start and instead working on it as they went. TBOGT ends later than IV or TLAD so they knew when doing the first two games that they still had plenty of time to finish the ending of the story. 

 

Other than that when there's three games set at the same time with a complicated web of several different plots running through them, and they weren't even all written/finished at the same time, it was just inevitable that some inconsistencies would happen.

From the in-game websites on IV and TLAD, after the storyline you can find various news articles, one of them being about the homeless guy finding the diamonds in a landfill off Charge Island (which would make sense as they fell into a passing heavy duty truck) and how they cashed them in and moved to Vice City.

 

You'll find the article about Maisonette being shut down for good too (as well as the original location of it).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
6 hours ago, Ash_735 said:

From the in-game websites on IV and TLAD, after the storyline you can find various news articles, one of them being about the homeless guy finding the diamonds in a landfill off Charge Island (which would make sense as they fell into a passing heavy duty truck) and how they cashed them in and moved to Vice City.

 

You'll find the article about Maisonette being shut down for good too (as well as the original location of it).

 

Ahh I see, that's cool. I guess they just tweaked it a bit to fit the ending they wanted with Luis.

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
  • 2 Users Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 2 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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