Post your reasons for NOT wanting a Vice City setting

[Middle Class Roadman]

Why do you not want GTA VI to be set in Vice City/Florida?

 

For me Miami is just a boring and over used location. Also the rural portion of the map is just as important as the cities and Florida only really has boring, repetitive flatlands to play with. 

[GTA-Biker]

I disagree about Vice City being overused,we only had two games set there,and the last one was released 15 years ago (even if you count open world games set in Miami in general,you have Scarface, Godfather 2 and maybe a handful of others).

I also disagree about flatlands being boring,other than Vice City itself there could be swamps similar to Lemonye in RDR 2, forests, swampy mangrove forests, grasslands, a few towns, etc.On the other hand,GTA 5 map wasn't flat but it was badly designed,it had lots of mountains and there was pretty much nothing to do on them (taking out most of them and instead adding another town would have been better),the desert and forests were tiny,and the towns of Sandy Shores, Grapeseed, Harmony and Stab City were so close to each other they felt like one big town.In my opinion,a well designed flat map would be much better than a badly designed map full of hills and mountains.

Edited June 19, 2021 by GTA-Biker

[Octane]

I can confidently say just about everyone is expecting it to be set in Vice City again.

[DexMacLeod]

It's mostly just the Florida flatness that bugs me. People claim there's nothing to do in the northern part of V's map but it's GTA. Outside of story missions and scripted events there's nothing to do anywhere on the map. The hills and mountains at least provided a wide variety of elevation change and curvy roads to make driving interesting.

 

The original Vice City was easily the most boring map for me and I don't really see how they could keep it accurate to Miami and make it fun to travel through.

[paperbagdude]

I am all in for an 80's themes Vice City for the next title of the franchise, however, it comes with its problems - most importantly setting.

Of what I can remember on top of my head, most GTA titles have been set in contemporary time according to the release date of the games, aside from SA, VC/VCS and LCS. Though setting the timeline of these games in the past hasn't been a problem for their players, doing so today can pose a threat to the fanbase and its interest in the game.

 

Why? Because of GTA V, particularly Online. Though the game is set in 2013 (or so) according to the game's release, GTA Online has had hundreds of additions of content based upon contemporary real-life vehicles etc., also including several types of content leaning toward science fiction, where ''modern contemporary technology'' is the backbone principle that may allow these ''revolutionary technological wonders'' to exist in the game in the first place. Prime examples is the Oppressor Mark I/II and Deluxo. Now, the popular fanbase has turned out to like this contemporary timeline which allows for such science fictional content to be enjoyed.

 

But can such content which is deeply loved by the fans be implemented in an 1980's setting? Probably not. Thus, if such child-pleasing content is not available for the fans, interest in the game will most likely plummet, as the game is literally stuck in the 80's. So really, it's a matter of either losing fans, thus players and ultimately revenue or having the game live the feared nightmare of Read Dead Online, regarding ''rocket horses'' and ''laser revolvers''.

[Guns a-Blazin]

Overused? Vice City has only been featured twice and not only that, the map is nearly 20 years old. It needs a refresh, a revival and a bit of touching up. 

 

I partly agree about the flatland stuff though. R* do need to cut down their focus on the countryside stuff and throw more of their focus/resources into maximising the city because in my opinion, GTA V's Los Santos was very poorly done.

[Zello]

8 hours ago, Orbea Occam said:

For me Miami is just a boring and over used location. Also the rural portion of the map is just as important as the cities and Florida only really has boring, repetitive flatlands to play with. 

Over used?

 

Tell me about any games set in Miami released in the past ten years?

 

Vice City stories and the Scarface game came out 15 YEARS AGO!!! I don't understand why people like to say it's overused because it's not.

[Middle Class Roadman]

Just now, Zello said:

Over used?

 

Tell me about any games set in Miami released in the past ten years?

 

Vice City stories and the Scarface game came out 15 YEARS AGO!!! I don't understand why people like to say it's overused because it's not.

 

Hello mate, should have made it clearer but I meant across all forms of mainstream media - films, tv shows, games, music videos, commercials - we've seen Miami millions of times before. I am already bored thinking about a Vice City setting for GTA VI.

[BabaFamilias]

I would love a Florida setting, BUT only if it would be set in present times, had a unique story and wouldn't only consist of Downtown Miami/Miami Beach. Maybe throw in Tampa, Orlando and/or some carribean island to spice things up. The 80's Miami setting is overdone, too cliché and just an idealization of what people think the 80's were. When I played Vice City as a kid, I thought it had the best story and characters in any video game. Fast forward couple of years later and I came to realize, that it is just a sh*tty Scarface x Miami Vice x Carlito's Way fanfic written by Dan Houser. 

 

The 80's (the real 80's, not the the 80's you see in Miami Vice or in the movies) look so bland:

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, GTA-Biker said:

GTA 5 map wasn't flat but it was badly designed,it had lots of mountains and there was pretty much nothing to do on them

 

Yeah, that's actually how most territories in real life are. You got a big city in the middle of nowhere and that city is surrounded by either more or less a dessert or a forest and a couple of villages. There is "nothing do to on them" either, except hiking, hunting or gathering mushrooms. I hate Ubisoft-like maps, where they try to make every inch of the map feel "alive" by adding random sh*t like towers, camps etc around the map but achieve the opposite. Let the world itself do the talking like in RDR2. Give me more animals, rivers and dense forests. Something like this:

 

 

I don't need "activities" everywhere on the map. This is GTA, create your own activities like a downward bike race, do a sightseeing on the cable car or do stunt jumps. 

[Zello]

Just now, Orbea Occam said:

 

Hello mate, should have made it clearer but I meant across all forms of mainstream media - films, tv shows, games, music videos, commercials - we've seen Miami millions of times before. I am already bored thinking about a Vice City setting for GTA VI.

Not many of those either and the ones that do aren't even filmed in Miami these days. CSI Miami was actually filmed in LA.

[The Tracker]

11 minutes ago, BabaFamilias said:

I would love a Florida setting, BUT only if it would be set in present times, had a unique story and wouldn't only consist of Downtown Miami/Miami Beach. Maybe throw in Tampa, Orlando and/or some carribean island to spice things up. The 80's Miami setting is overdone, too cliché and just an idealization of what people think the 80's were. When I played Vice City as a kid, I thought it had the best story and characters in any video game. Fast forward couple of years later and I came to realize, that it is just a sh*tty Scarface x Miami Vice x Carlito's Way fanfic written by Dan Houser. 

 

The 80's (the real 80's, not the the 80's you see in Miami Vice or in the movies) look so bland:

 

 

 

 

 

I mean, If we go onto that logic, it's not the 80's themselves that looked "bland" but real life in general.

 

11 minutes ago, BabaFamilias said:

Yeah, that's actually how most territories in real life are. You got a big city in the middle of nowhere and that city is surrounded by either more or less a dessert or a forest and a couple of villages. There is "nothing do to on them" either, except hiking, hunting or gathering mushrooms. I hate Ubisoft-like maps, where they try to make every inch of the map feel "alive" by adding random sh*t like towers, camps etc around the map but achieve the opposite. Let the world itself do the talking like in RDR2. Give me more animals, rivers and dense forests. Something like this:

 

The problem with GTA V's countryside wasn't the lack of things to do, but rather the cluttered and messy desing it had, the game focused more on naked mountains everywhere rather than actual dense ecosystems to get lost in, the few forestal and desertic areas didn't even felt like their real life counterparts, both lacked the nature of what those eco-system truly feel like in reality. SA barely had things to do on its countryside, yet you could get lost for hours, simply because of the fact that it felt profound and interesting enough to explore every inch of it, with the constant sensation of being isolated.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, FortifiedGooner86 said:

GTA V's Los Santos was very poorly done.

So how come other game devs avoid doing open world in Los Angeles 

[The Tracker]

3 minutes ago, SwishiestRock29 said:

So how come other game devs avoid doing open world in Los Angeles 

 

Because the game is popular and they don't want to be associated with GTA, nothing to do with the quality of the game in any aspect, but rather what it's known for.

[Middle Class Roadman]

42 minutes ago, Damien Scott said:

A new setting based on Chicago and Detroit or Northern San Andreas (SF + LV) are much more interesting locations than Vice City.

 

Exactly this. We need GTA VI to be set in a new location based on a dark, gritty mid western city for it to be the groundbreaking GTA game that we all want. 

[BabaFamilias]

12 minutes ago, The Tracker said:

I mean, If we go onto that logic, it's not the 80's themselves that looked "bland" but real life in general.

 

Did you even look at the pictures or are you already on the "Project Americas" hype train? More vegetation, buildings that weren't there, not everyone driving the Ferrari Testarossa, everyone driving sh*tty cars, no flashy lights 24/7 or wearing pink/white suits etc

 

 

Why do you guys always want the same old sh*t instead of new ideas? There are so many things that changed the world between 2013-2021: Bitcoins, electric cars, the world going more eco-friendly, the rise of Uber, the rise of online streaming, smart watches, drones, ear pods, the Cybertruck, the president of the USA throwing fits on Twitter, people caring more about hygiene since COVID, Zoom meetings, etc. 

 

While having all these opportunities and ideas lying in front of you, why go "Hmm, you know what? Why don't we make another 80's game?" - "Yeah, that's awesome dude! Lets do some research, lets watch some 80's movies to get more info into this, hey has anyone heard of 'Narcos'?"

 

43 minutes ago, The Tracker said:

The problem with GTA V's countryside wasn't the lack of things to do, but rather the cluttered and messy desing it had, the game focused more on naked mountains everywhere rather than actual dense ecosystems to get lost in, the few forestal and desertic areas didn't even felt like their real life counterparts, both lacked the nature of what those eco-system truly feel like in reality. SA barely had things to do on its countryside, yet you could get lost for hours, simply because of the fact that it felt profound and interesting enough to explore every inch of it, with the constant sensation of being isolated.

 

No, you got lost in SA because the draw distance was so poor and the damn trees wouldn't spawn in front of you, except for the last inches before you crashed into them. In V they had to cut so much content because of the hardware limitations. Los Santos was supposed to have way more vegetation than we were presented. But looking at RDR2, you can see Rockstar are in fact capable of recreating a life like representation of nature. I would rather not have the complete map being just a city floating on the ocean like IV. Where are the farms? Where do the people get their food? Where is the military? 

[Collibosher]

-Flat geography

-Lots of beaches, canals, swamps etc. (awful for any gameplay)

-Too many similarities with LS (after 8 years of GTAV, I'm done with shallow lifestyle in sunshine and beaches)

-it's flat tho

 

In the end these southern cities just don't excite me in that way, it's mostly geographic. For me one of the main things about GTAs is, that even when you have nothing in particular to do, you can still enjoy just driving around aimlessly, and I'm not really getting that feeling when googling Miami or rural Florida. Flying doesn't exactly excite either

 

 

Vice City will work perfectly as long as it's accompanied with at least one other significant city+surrounding area or if the scale and detail is out of this world. But I would rather have something less sunny for a change...

[BabaFamilias]

1 hour ago, Damien Scott said:

A new setting based on Chicago and Detroit or Northern San Andreas (SF + LV) are much more interesting locations than Vice City.

 

I totally love the idea of just sticking with Los Santos and connect SF + LV to it. Just update Los Santos, add interiors and vegetation and voilà GTA VI: 

 

[gucciflipflops]

3 hours ago, Damien Scott said:

A new setting based on Chicago and Detroit or Northern San Andreas (SF + LV) are much more interesting locations than Vice City.

 

you have a point sir, i don't really care where the next GTA is, but i think vice city should be revisited before something entirely new is done. any city in america could be an interesting location or could be equally as boring.

 

vice city seems like the most logical location to return to and not because 99.9% of all the leaks are all pointing to it, but it wouldn't make sense to just leave behind one of their original locations and one that hasn't been done for almost 20 years. 

 

las ventuas and san fierro could be added to expanded and enhanced as the time that GTA V has been out is probably enough for them to have been recreated. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Orbea Occam said:

 

Exactly this. We need GTA VI to be set in a new location based on a dark, gritty mid western city for it to be the groundbreaking GTA game that we all want. 

 

need? or want? with all due respect, seems way too soon to go back to dark and gritty and arguably it would be reminiscent of liberty city and alderney.

 

based on the themes of the previous titles, i think there could be a focus on small-town america and the american dream as well as immigration. and i think most people would prefer flat miami to mile high denver or windy chicago. "the mexican" is probably true so that's a little hint. i'm pretty sure it's safe to say that it's vice city but if it's not then so be it, but i'm sure at this point, you know it is without actually knowing.

 

1 hour ago, Collibosher said:

-Flat geography

-Lots of beaches, canals, swamps etc. (awful for any gameplay)

-Too many similarities with LS (after 8 years of GTAV, I'm done with shallow lifestyle in sunshine and beaches)

-it's flat tho

 

only a small portion of it was beach though. makes my blood boil when people say that they are too similar, yes they both have beaches, palm trees (which aren't even native to california) and warm sunny weather, the two cities couldn't be any more different. i mean, you could say miami has a lot in common with seattle or dubai as they have residential islands and a beautiful skyline.

 

there could always be more than just a single location, like in san andreas, would be nice to make you feel like you're in a completely different GTA. 

Edited June 20, 2021 by gucciflipflops

[The Tracker]

48 minutes ago, BabaFamilias said:

 

Did you even look at the pictures or are you already on the "Project Americas" hype train? More vegetation, buildings that weren't there, not everyone driving the Ferrari Testarossa, everyone driving sh*tty cars, no flashy lights 24/7 or wearing pink/white suits etc

 

And do you know the whole world in a time period isn't defined by a single picture?

 

Quote

Why do you guys always want the same old sh*t instead of new ideas? There are so many things that changed the world between 2013-2021: Bitcoins, electric cars, the world going more eco-friendly, the rise of Uber, the rise of online streaming, smart watches, drones, ear pods, the Cybertruck, the president of the USA throwing fits on Twitter, people caring more about hygiene since COVID, Zoom meetings, etc. 

 

While having all these opportunities and ideas lying in front of you, why go "Hmm, you know what? Why don't we make another 80's game?" - "Yeah, that's awesome dude! Lets do some research, lets watch some 80's movies to get more info into this, hey has anyone heard of 'Narcos'?"

 

Maybe because I don't want to see the same stuff I see every minute of my daily life in a videogame? I couldn't very much about Bitcoins or COVID when I want to be sucked into a different reality that is a videogame. It's kinda ironic that you talk about new ideas, when the last two GTA games were contemporary and already talked about a big part of the stuff you've mentioned, while the last period piece GTA game we've had was released almost 20 years ago, and feels completely different than 99.9% of the kind of open worlds you see these days. I ain't against the idea of the next GTA game being set in modern day, it can be ambitious in its own right, don't get me wrong, but if you ever let me choose between that, and a fresh 20th century period piece game (That is completely lacking in modern AAA games) I'd take the latter completely.

 

48 minutes ago, BabaFamilias said:

No, you got lost in SA because the draw distance was so poor and the damn trees wouldn't spawn in front of you, except for the last inches before you crashed into them. In V they had to cut so much content because of the hardware limitations. Los Santos was supposed to have way more vegetation than we were presented.

 

Nope, we got lost in GTA SA because it provided wide, open areas that were completely new in the franchise at the time, unlike V, every inch of it was explorable, and you actually had reasons to be there as the map featured not only 1, but 3 different cities, "getting lost" in a map is more than feeling away from civilization (That is what the poor draw distance helped with), it's about being immersed into the environment. With or without vegetation, V's map would feel exactly the same, as the core, cluttered desing of it is still there.

Edited June 20, 2021 by The Tracker

[GTA-Biker]

2 hours ago, BabaFamilias said:

 

Yeah, that's actually how most territories in real life are. You got a big city in the middle of nowhere and that city is surrounded by either more or less a dessert or a forest and a couple of villages. There is "nothing do to on them" either, except hiking, hunting or gathering mushrooms. I hate Ubisoft-like maps, where they try to make every inch of the map feel "alive" by adding random sh*t like towers, camps etc around the map but achieve the opposite. Let the world itself do the talking like in RDR2. Give me more animals, rivers and dense forests. Something like this:

 

 

I don't need "activities" everywhere on the map. This is GTA, create your own activities like a downward bike race, do a sightseeing on the cable car or do stunt jumps. 

The problem is that the desert and the forests are too small,and cluttered with man-made objects (roads, electric poles, fences, signs, billboards, etc.) to the point where you never feel like you're in the middle of nowhere,like you would in the forest on that picture,instead everywhere you look you see some signs of civilization.As for the mountains,unlike forests where you can explore or hunt animals,or deserts where you can cruise on some open road listening to the radio and feel like you're on a roadtrip,there's literally nothing to do on a mountain (which is a problem because this is a video game we're talking about and nobody plays a video game to be bored and have nothing to do).They take up like 1/3 of the map,they're hard to climb both on foot and even in a vehicle,there's nothing to explore because everything's in the open since there's little to no plants to hide something,and the only way down is usually to tumble down which results in getting wasted.

 

1 hour ago, The Tracker said:

 

The problem with GTA V's countryside wasn't the lack of things to do, but rather the cluttered and messy desing it had, the game focused more on naked mountains everywhere rather than actual dense ecosystems to get lost in, the few forestal and desertic areas didn't even felt like their real life counterparts, both lacked the nature of what those eco-system truly feel like in reality. SA barely had things to do on its countryside, yet you could get lost for hours, simply because of the fact that it felt profound and interesting enough to explore every inch of it, with the constant sensation of being isolated.

Exactly,it feels like on one hand they put a bunch of empty mountains with nothing to do on them,and on the other hand put too much stuff on a few flat areas.SA map was much better designed,there was just enough empty places to feel realistic,but there was still enough stuff around to not feel like you have nothing to do.

[Zello]

1 hour ago, BabaFamilias said:

Why do you guys always want the same old sh*t instead of new ideas? There are so many things that changed the world between 2013-2021: Bitcoins, electric cars, the world going more eco-friendly, the rise of Uber, the rise of online streaming, smart watches, drones, ear pods, the Cybertruck, the president of the USA throwing fits on Twitter, people caring more about hygiene since COVID, Zoom meetings, etc. 

 

While having all these opportunities and ideas lying in front of you, why go "Hmm, you know what? Why don't we make another 80's game?" - "Yeah, that's awesome dude! Lets do some research, lets watch some 80's movies to get more info into this, hey has anyone heard of 'Narcos'?"

 

How does any if that fit GTA though? Since when did criminals off the street give a damn about what the president tweets, discuss criminal activities over zoom, and start caring about the environment?

 

"Hey man can you believe what the president just tweeted? Lets go rob us a few banks that'll teach him. I'll go get our environmentally friendly car!"

Edited June 20, 2021 by Zello

[GTA-Biker]

1 hour ago, BabaFamilias said:

 

Why do you guys always want the same old sh*t instead of new ideas? There are so many things that changed the world between 2013-2021: Bitcoins, electric cars, the world going more eco-friendly, the rise of Uber, the rise of online streaming, smart watches, drones, ear pods, the Cybertruck, the president of the USA throwing fits on Twitter, people caring more about hygiene since COVID, Zoom meetings, etc. 

 

While having all these opportunities and ideas lying in front of you, why go "Hmm, you know what? Why don't we make another 80's game?" - "Yeah, that's awesome dude! Lets do some research, lets watch some 80's movies to get more info into this, hey has anyone heard of 'Narcos'?"

How would any of that make gameplay better and different than what we had so far?How would using Bitcoins be any different from using regular GTA money?How would using Uber be any different than using a taxi?Also,electric cars were already in GTA 5 (and why would I care about being eco friendly in a virtual world?),online streaming would probably just be the same few videos on a loop similar to the TV shows in GTA 5,drones would pretty much be reskinned RC helicopters from VC and SA,ear pods are just fancy headphones,the Cybertruck is just one car whose inclusion wouldn't make the game any better or worse,Trump is neither the president anymore nor is he on Twitter from what I've heard (and why would a random criminal like the GTA protagonist care what the president is saying on Twitter?),and as soon as I forget all this sh*t with covid, masks, Zoom and anything else related to it,the better,the last thing I want is playing 2020 simulator for the next 5-10 years.

Edited June 20, 2021 by GTA-Biker

[BabaFamilias]

 

1 hour ago, The Tracker said:

And do you know the whole world in a time period isn't defined by a single picture?

 

I don't know, I hadn't lived in the 80's, maybe you could give me more info about that. All I see is you being against opinions, but do you even have own opinions? Why would the 80's make more sense than being contemporary? What unique ideas could the 80's tell that we hadn't heard before? What's the benefit over being contemporary?

 

1 hour ago, The Tracker said:

Maybe because I don't want to see the same stuff I see every minute of my daily life in a videogame? I couldn't very much about Bitcoins or COVID when I want to be sucked into a different reality that is a videogame.

 

Man, you really got an exciting life, when playing GTA doesn't differ from your reality. Maybe historical games like Assassin's Creed, Mafia or Kingdom Come meet your taste more, if you need a different time period to get "sucked in" or don't want to hear about current real life events. 

 

1 hour ago, The Tracker said:

It's kinda ironic that you talk about new ideas, when the last two GTA games were contemporary and already talked about a big part of the stuff you've mentioned

 

Can you give me some examples? I didn't see any drones, smart watches, cybertruck, Uber, etc in GTA IV or V. You know that the timeline in GTA Online progresses forward with every DLC release, right? Lets turn the tables, what unique 80's ideas hadn't we already seen or why is old tech better except you not being able to get "sucked in"?

 

1 hour ago, The Tracker said:

while the last period piece GTA game we've had was released almost 20 years ago, and feels completely different than 99.9% of the kind of open worlds you see these days

 

There aren't any big crime-oriented open world action adventures left anymore, so it isn't that of an achievement being "different" than either a contemporary GTA or WatchDogs. The last period piece GTA we had was 15 years ago and it was pretty mediocre. What made Vice City Stories so different for you? It can't be the empire building, because that sh*t sucked balls. And Vice City was a fan fiction by Dan Houser. It isn't that of an achievement to straight up rip off ideas of big movies and call them a "homage" or "parody". I am surprised they didn't got sued for copyright infringement. 

 

1 hour ago, The Tracker said:

Nope, we got lost in GTA SA because it provided wide, open areas that were completely new in the franchise at the time, unlike V, every inch of it was explorable, and you actually had reasons to be there as the map featured not only 1, but 3 different cities, "getting lost" in a map is more than feeling away from civilization (That is what the poor draw distance helped with), it's about being immersed into the environment. With or without vegetation, V's map would feel exactly the same, as the core, cluttered desing of it is still there.

 

 

Yes, like I said hardware limitations and cut content, but that shouldn't mean leaving out rural areas and mountains completely for the next GTA. I am pretty sure, the rural region in VI will impress you .

 

46 minutes ago, Zello said:

How does any if that fit GTA though? Since when did criminals off the street give a damn about what the president tweets, discuss criminal activities over zoom, and start caring about the environment?

 

"Hey man can you believe what the president just tweeted? Lets go rob us a few banks that'll teach him. I'll go get our environmentally friendly car!"

 

 

25 minutes ago, GTA-Biker said:

How would any of that make gameplay better and differet than what we had so far?

 

You guys now that GTA supposed to be a parody of America, right? These are the things which are/were hot topic and had their effect on modern America. You remember the "Mark Zuckerberg/Steve Jobs" mission in GTA V or the internet café in IV? Or the Donald Love missions in III? Or Phil Collins in VCS?

 

Edit: It feels like GTA IV was the first GTA for many people here.

Edited June 20, 2021 by BabaFamilias

[Collibosher]

1 hour ago, gucciflipflops said:

you could say miami has a lot in common with dubai as they both have residential islands.

I WOULD probably say that tho... It's about that overall "tone" and features, that in this case beaches and sunshine create. Similar locations and niche assets AGAIN; dune buggies, jetskis, beach npcs, celebrity parodies... It doesn't help that the main focus/joke with GTA V marketing was about the beach&sunshine part of the map. Look at the first 18 seconds of GTA V trailer and tell me that's not how a GTA trailer set in VC would start.

 

(I always mention this, but TV shows that are set in Miami, are often shot in California, proving they can look quite similar)

[Zello]

1 hour ago, BabaFamilias said:

And Vice City was a fan fiction by Dan Houser. It isn't that of an achievement to straight up rip off ideas of big movies and call them a "homage" or "parody". I am surprised they didn't got sued for copyright infringement. 

By that logic then so is V it ripped off Heat from Michael Mann.

 

 

[BabaFamilias]

3 minutes ago, Zello said:

By that logic then so is V it ripped off Heat from Michael Mann.

 

Yes, Michaels look and some missions are ripped off Heat. There is no shame in taking inspirations, but just look at this:

 

 

 

Even the final mission in Vice City is inspired by Scarface. 

 

Some people are afraid that we won't get a good GTA story, because Dan Houser left Rockstar. His successor only needs to watch some crime movies and try his best at fan fiction.

[kobeni]

There is none. It's the perfect setting.

[Zello]

9 hours ago, Damien Scott said:

 Northern San Andreas (SF + LV) are much more interesting locations than Vice City.

Modern day Las Vegas and San Francisco are the most boring locations.

 

Las Vegas is a resort town now that the days of the Mafia are over. All you do these days is either go gambling at the casinos, watch some live boxing/MMA fights, or bang some hookers that's it.

 

San Francisco is one of most expensive cities in the United States and due to that not much crime happens there at all. Unless you find corporate espionage fun stealing a patent from one of the companies in Silicon valley. San Francisco also has a homeless and pooping problem look it up homeless people poop all over the streets of San Francisco. Unless you find the idea of a homeless protagonist who uses the sidewalk in front of the Ifruit store as his safehouse and he has to stop the other homeless people from pooping all over the city fun no thank you. All the crime happens across the bridge in Oakland.

Edited June 20, 2021 by Zello

[GhettoJesus]

5 hours ago, BabaFamilias said:

Some people are afraid that we won't get a good GTA story, because Dan Houser left Rockstar. His successor only needs to watch some crime movies and try his best at fan fiction.

Funny thing is that Vice City's story was the least original as they took a lot of elements from Scarface yet it was the best GTA story. Goes to show that Dan Houser isn't a great story writer.

 

9 hours ago, Orbea Occam said:

Hello mate, should have made it clearer but I meant across all forms of mainstream media - films, tv shows, games, music videos, commercials - we've seen Miami millions of times before. I am already bored thinking about a Vice City setting for GTA VI.

Recently? I am not too much into movies but I couldn't name a single media from the top of my head that is set in Miami.

 

8 hours ago, Orbea Occam said:

Exactly this. We need GTA VI to be set in a new location based on a dark, gritty mid western city for it to be the groundbreaking GTA game that we all want. 

So you are fine with Chicago but complain about Florida's flatness? The area surrounding Chicago is just as flat and I'd argue it's way less interesting because all you have is cornfields. I don't mind flat geography too much in general. Plus it's not like Florida is just grasslands. You have swamps, marshes and forests as well. Throw in Key West and another city from Western Florida and maybe something in the Caribbeans and there you go, such a great map. Besides, if you want mountains than having Cuba, Jamaica, Haiti or Dominica in the game, or at least portions of them, can do the trick.

[iRacle]

18 hours ago, Orbea Occam said:

Why do you not want GTA VI to be set in Vice City/Florida?

 

For me Miami is just a boring and over used location. Also the rural portion of the map is just as important as the cities and Florida only really has boring, repetitive flatlands to play with. 

As long as it's in modern times, I'm okay with Vice City