Why is the main story in Vice City so short?

[RussianBoy]

I think it's even shorter than GTA IIIs. I love Vice City, it's my favourite GTA game along with San Andreas, but it's way too short.

[universetwisters]

Because it doesn’t hold your hand and leaves you to your own devices to make money and keep it moving 

 

E. Just to clarify, I know some people who think you beat the game once you kill Diaz and take his mansion over and I’m like loooool that’s where you’re wrong kiddo

Edited December 8, 2022 by universetwisters

[ArmanCan]

@RussianBoy Because the deal was ambushed and Tommy's main "Engagement" became chasing the money.. 

 

After that the flow became really weird and boring.. Hanging out with Cubans was kinda fun but buying the assets and doing the errands were boring..

 

I think this is all same in all GTA games.. At first you are finding yourself in the middle of the trouble and than you end up being a millionare..  

[Bruhity]

if you just killed diaz, you didn't finish it yet.

you need to complete property missions first (exceptions are Vice Port, Sunshine Autos, Etc) and then you can beat the game!

Edited December 14, 2022 by Bruhity

[Row x Salvation]

Also have to think that the game was originally going to be an expansion to III but they ended up using a different version of the game engine (RenderWare), so they decided to make it a full proper title.

I guess at the point you kill Diaz you're just purchasing businesses and doing what feel like sidemissions essentially filler content to get to the last mission.

 

[Evil empire]

Because this game was rushed, it has been mentioned in these forums at least 1000000 times.

[Jack-F-2001]

It was really short, I don't know why but I thought that when I played it as well. Still a great game though.

[salazarcosplay]

Because we compare killing Diaz to killing Salvatore and in III we kept doing more

[cant remember]

I took a look at the wiki, VC does have fewer main missions than GTA3, but the asset missions, which have cutscenes and are actual proper missions too, make up for it so both games are roughly the same. So I suppose it's mostly a perception because of how quickly you take over Diaz's mansion and the game stops giving you clear markers?

[salazarcosplay]

On 12/7/2022 at 7:20 PM, universetwisters said:

Because it doesn’t hold your hand and leaves you to your own devices to make money and keep it moving 

 

E. Just to clarify, I know some people who think you beat the game once you kill Diaz and take his mansion over and I’m like loooool that’s where you’re wrong kiddo

This would be the equivalent of people thinking you beat GTA III after killing Salvatore.

 

On 11/19/2023 at 8:41 AM, cant remember said:

I took a look at the wiki, VC does have fewer main missions than GTA3, but the asset missions, which have cutscenes and are actual proper missions too, make up for it so both games are roughly the same. So I suppose it's mostly a perception because of how quickly you take over Diaz's mansion and the game stops giving you clear markers?

I wish GTA would have been updated after Vice City and you can take over the businesses  like the junkyard in Harwood, the auto place that had the banshee, the gas station, the diner on calahan point, the fish factory, and after killing salvatore you can take over st marks bistro, luigis club, and salvatore's gentlemen club

[universetwisters]

6 hours ago, salazarcosplay said:

This would be the equivalent of people thinking you beat GTA III after killing Salvatore.

 

No? The game still tells you what to do; it literally introduces you to Kenji and Asuka as mission givers and so forth.

[AmigaMix]

On 11/20/2023 at 11:25 PM, universetwisters said:

No? The game still tells you what to do; it literally introduces you to Kenji and Asuka as mission givers and so forth.

 "Rub Out" unlocks further story missions as well, you'd be stuck after "Cop Land" or "Publicity Tour".

[universetwisters]

55 minutes ago, AmigaMix said:

 "Rub Out" unlocks further story missions as well, you'd be stuck after "Cop Land" or "Publicity Tour".

Yea but even then, you need the print works (and I believe the Malibu club?) to unlock the final missions and the game doesn’t make that explicitly clear in any way 

[AmigaMix]

27 minutes ago, universetwisters said:

Yea but even then, you need the print works (and I believe the Malibu club?) to unlock the final missions and the game doesn’t make that explicitly clear in any way 

Right, but the lack of closing credits after the previously mentioned missions should be a pretty good indicator that the game isn't over.

Edited November 24 by AmigaMix

[universetwisters]

1 hour ago, AmigaMix said:

Right, but the lack of closing credits after the previously mentioned missions should be a pretty good indicator that the game isn't over.

In all fairness, not every game has closing credits tho

[AmigaMix]

30 minutes ago, universetwisters said:

In all fairness, not every game has closing credits tho

Story driven games usually have some way of letting you know you finished the game, most of the time it's going to be closing credits.

Edited November 24 by AmigaMix

[universetwisters]

10 minutes ago, AmigaMix said:

Story driven games usually have some way of letting you know you finished the game, most of the time it's going to be closing credits.

This is true but, for a genre as open ended as sandbox games are, I can believe someone if they say “isn’t there no real end to the game? Maybe that’s why they didn’t have credits”

 

Idk on one hand I give VC a lot of credit for not holding your hand and telling you what to do but, on the other hand, you can’t deny that it’ll just leave you stuck after a point if you don’t know what to buy, etc. It’s not like that ruins the game though 

[AmigaMix]

1 hour ago, universetwisters said:

for a genre as open ended as sandbox games are, I can believe someone if they say “isn’t there no real end to the game? Maybe that’s why they didn’t have credits” 

I believe there might be some players who approach GTA with a "misguided" mindset, R* categorically rejects the notion that they develop sandbox games.

 

1 hour ago, universetwisters said:

Idk on one hand I give VC a lot of credit for not holding your hand and telling you what to do but, on the other hand, you can’t deny that it’ll just leave you stuck after a point if you don’t know what to buy, etc. It’s not like that ruins the game though 

While I won't deny that VC's structure is of a more "esoteric" nature than III (or pretty much any R* game after it), you basically unlock those last few missions by... playing the game.

Almost every asset in the game comes with a set of missions, including cutscenes, a player would pretty much have to avoid buying any of them to "lose the plot", so to speak.

Edited November 24 by AmigaMix

[universetwisters]

52 minutes ago, AmigaMix said:

 

 

While I won't deny that VC's structure is of a more "esoteric" nature than III (or pretty much any R* game after it), you basically unlock those last few missions by... playing the game.

Almost every asset in the game comes with a set of missions, including cutscenes, a player would pretty much have to avoid buying any of them to "lose the plot", so to speak.

This is true but, again, does the game tell you which assets to buy?

[AmigaMix]

12 hours ago, universetwisters said:

This is true but, again, does the game tell you which assets to buy?

No, but GTA III doesn't tell you which of its missions are mandatory either.

Edited November 25 by AmigaMix

[Ub-Oh]

Assets not being marked on the map is the problem. They are hidden like the packages. The game introduces them in a manner very similiar to side missions (like Burglary in SA) and only shows Malibu Club as an obvious one. In my first playthrough, I knew there was more after Rub Out since Sonny was still alive, but I didn't expect them to advance the storyline.

[44Orca]

It's the assets too I think, but then again game has overall shorter missions too than GTA III and San Andreas so that might be it. (Especially compared to San Andreas). From what I noticed playing missions from every of the old games recently at least.

Edited November 25 by 44Orca

[universetwisters]

5 hours ago, Ub-Oh said:

Assets not being marked on the map is the problem. They are hidden like the packages. The game introduces them in a manner very similiar to side missions (like Burglary in SA) and only shows Malibu Club as an obvious one. In my first playthrough, I knew there was more after Rub Out since Sonny was still alive, but I didn't expect them to advance the storyline.

I was just about to ask this, if the assets were marked on t he map or not. Especially in the case of the print works, it’s so out of the way and I don’t think you ever go there for anything before you’re supposed to buy it so you can’t blame someone for missing it lol

[AmigaMix]

I completely forgot about the inconsistent use of map markers, that's one f*cked up way to artificially extend a game's length. 

[universetwisters]

7 hours ago, AmigaMix said:

I completely forgot about the inconsistent use of map markers, that's one f*cked up way to artificially extend a game's length. 

TBH I think it’s a good way to pad out a game’s length because it actively encourages exploration. At least compared to the other way sandbox games are padded out (looking at you, Mafia 3) I can get behind Vice City

Edited November 26 by universetwisters

[Mister Pink]

Was it short though? It didn't feel short to me at the time. 

 

How Long To Beat as it at the following:  Main Story: 18 Hours  |  Main + Sides: 25½ Hours | Completionist: 40½ Hours

 

Let's compare that to some other big titles that year - and I'll go by Main Story: 

 

• Medal of Honor:  Frontline  - 9 hours
• Resident Evil - 11 hours
• Splinter Cell - 12½ hours
• Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind - 44hrs
• Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 - 9hrs
• Battlefield: 1942 - 7½ hours

It's actually quite long at the time with only Morrowind out that list beating it. Even if you still consider it short by Rockstar's efforts it was made in 12 months. To sign all the all-star Hollywood cast and record all their parts, secure all the licensed music, animate it and design the city it's insanely impressive. 

[AmigaMix]

20 hours ago, universetwisters said:

TBH I think it’s a good way to pad out a game’s length because it actively encourages exploration. At least compared to the other way sandbox games are padded out (looking at you, Mafia 3) I can get behind Vice City

Comparatively speaking, yes, since you only have to find those assets once... it's just that one would generally expect 'hidden' content to be optional content as well.

Edited November 27 by AmigaMix

[universetwisters]

2 hours ago, AmigaMix said:

it's just that one would generally expect 'hidden' content to be optional content as well.

I feel like you could consider the ice cream factory and the strip club (f*ck that place as an asset lmao) to be optional since they don’t really progress the story in any meaningful way, at least not in the way you’d expect the print shops would, what with the counterfeiting money crap and all

 

idk I feel like the issue is that we’re trying to look at vice city in modern terms when it’s 20+ years old. Maybe it was trying to break the mold as to what a game should be back then? I dunno. I was like six when that game came out so I don’t know if it was trying to be revolutionary and challenge the standards of what a game is or just the victim of sh*tty writing and a rushed development cycle.

[AmigaMix]

1 hour ago, universetwisters said:

idk I feel like the issue is that we’re trying to look at vice city in modern terms when it’s 20+ years old. Maybe it was trying to break the mold as to what a game should be back then? I dunno. I was like six when that game came out so I don’t know if it was trying to be revolutionary and challenge the standards of what a game is or just the victim of sh*tty writing and a rushed development cycle.

"Trying to break the mold" sounds like a plausible explanation to me.

R* had to design the whole asset-aspect of the game from the ground up, when they could have played it safe by streamlining things.