In a theoretical world where GTA went on hiatus after VC until 2013 (but R* still made the other games) and called GTA V-GTA LS:

[KingAJ032304]

How would you feel about GTA (LS) and what would you do between 2002 and 2013?

[AkshayKumar]

For me it would be pretty much the same, I was incredibly hyped for V as is and thought it was great and don't see that changing with the absence of the other GTAs , if anything it would be a bit more. 

 

I don't think I'd be doing anything different in that period either as I wasn't following GTA that keenly then. Was mainly playing Vice City and San Andreas, I guess in this time line I'll just play Vice City lol, though I wonder if I'd tire of it. 

 

In general, perhaps the critics of V today will look at it more favorably cause San Andreas and IV won't be there as reference points, probably the map would not be criticized as much as it does today for the excess mountains and desert and whatnot, instead it could be seen as a huge upgrade from VC and III. Also would be funny in this situation where V would not only the first GTA to let you swim but they also built a fully fledged underwater, quite the change from VC lol. 

 

V could be seen as the best GTA more strongly than it is now though then again there was a thread about why GTA III was better than V so idk about that. It's entirely possible V could feel too different from VC and III with no San Andreas as a 'bridge' between these games so maybe it would be seen as betraying the tone of GTA lmao (it would be interesting to see what the GTA fanbase would be like with VC being the second last GTA too) 

Edited October 3, 2021 by Wayne Kerr

[Algonquin Assassin]

I wouldn’t have got to experience the masterpiece that is GTA IV.

 

In all seriousness of course in a hypothetical world where San Andreas and GTA IV didn’t/don’t exist many of GTA V’s shortcomings wouldn’t be as noticeable or not even be issues at all, but then again there are still things about GTA V I don’t like very much even compared to Vice City and GTA III to a lesser extent.

 

For instance I love the assets in Vice City as they add so much to the experience so after 11 years of waiting and the best R* could come up with are the “properties” in GTA V I probably would still be disappointed by those.

 

Then there’s other things like the map which I’d still be intrinsically be tempted to compare by playing RDR1. I don’t like the “crater” layout of GTA V’s map so that wouldn’t change without any prior experience. There’s also other things that San Andreas and GTA IV don’t even need to be apart of like GTA V’s  insanely restrictive mission design and approach to freedom in general which would feel jarring compared to GTA III and Vice City.

[KingAJ032304]

2 hours ago, MiamiViceCity1986 said:

Then there’s other things like the map which I’d still be intrinsically be tempted to compare by playing RDR1. 

R* games like Max Payne 3 would probably gain more attention as well and that game in combination with RDR 1 would still make GTA V's euphoria ragdoll's system look kind of ass still now that you mentioned it. Unrelatedly would you still consider GTA V a true GTA?

 

5 hours ago, Wayne Kerr said:

Also would be funny in this situation where V would not only the first GTA to let you swim but they also built a fully fledged underwater, quite the change from VC lol. --- so maybe it would be seen as betraying the tone of GTA lmao (it would be interesting to see what the GTA fanbase would be like with VC being the second last GTA too) 

Was Bully the only other non GTA open world R* game to have swimming? Also do you think this would make people more warm to GTA O's direction in focus since there's little to compare it to or less because the ogs felt they were REALLY betrayed? 

 

Edited October 3, 2021 by KingAJ032304

[GhettoJesus]

I think V would be viewed far more favorably. Could you imagine the jump from Vice City to V? From a small map to a huge map, from 1 protagonist to 3 protagonists, from a handful of vehicles to a ton of vehicles. I feel like a lot less people would be in cross with the game although in my opinion some of the problems would still show. Restrictive mission design is one that comes to my mind. Just compare Sir, Yes Sir from VC to any mission in GTA V. Would be a bit pathetic to see, no? We would go from having many different ways to steal a tank to failing the mission for not following someone. But in my opinion it would overall improve the game's reputation. You can decide whether that would be a good or a bad thing. Personally I believe it would lower the expectations for a lot of GTA fans and the fanbase could be satisfied more easily..

Edited October 3, 2021 by GhettoJesus

[billiejoearmstrong8]

Even with just a jump from VCS to V (I missed playing IV due to not having a new console at the time) I thought GTA V was the greatest game of all time and loved playing it for years. Only going back and playing the vastly superior IV showed me differently and somewhat unfortunately ruined playing V for me. 

 

So in this scenario it would be that, but even more. Maybe if I'd played RDR1 first (which I also missed at the time) it would've cooled down my impression of it to be about the same though.