Why aren't Vice City& San Andreas counted 4&5?

[zlzgr]

There was GTA 1, 2, then 3 as the first 3D game, then Vice City and San Andreas and then Iv(4) and V(5). Why?

I understand why not count the stories as 4 and 5 since they are  prequal and not among the main series(like spin off or something).

But why did rockstar decided that Vice City would be better then IV(4) and San Andreas better than V(5), and then IV would be VI and V would be Vii

 

I really don't get it

Is there anyreason for that? Or does anyone here has a speculation

I am sorry if this question looks a bit stupid but I am interested in the reason for this decision.

 

Thank you and have a nice day guys

[The-Ghost]

I have always wondered about this myself, I can't think of any reason besides just wanting those games to be unique and then wanting IV to be a signification of a new "era", which it was, but then V is also part of that same era so who knows.

It's worth mentioning that Vice City was supposed to be an addition to GTAIII, I wonder if that has any contribution to the naming.

Also, I don't think I am with you in saying the stories shouldn't be counted, they really are part of the main storylines, they all recite the same narrative and connected events.

[cant remember]

I see it like this:

GTA1, GTA2, GTA3 and GTA4 each were a huge technological leap and run on totally different engines.

All the named ones are based off of an existing game, London is GTA1 with a different coat of paint, Vice City is technically III with a different map/story,..

 

The only exception to that rule would be GTA5 but I suppose they figured with TLAD and TBOGT in between the improvements warranted a new numbered entry.

Aswell as San Andreas somewhat, it's based on III/Vice but it has so many improvements it might almost have been a numbered entry.

[The Journey]

On 9/28/2023 at 6:59 AM, cant remember said:

I see it like this:

GTA1, GTA2, GTA3 and GTA4 each were a huge technological leap and run on totally different engines.

All the named ones are based off of an existing game, London is GTA1 with a different coat of paint, Vice City is technically III with a different map/story,..

 

The only exception to that rule would be GTA5 but I suppose they figured with TLAD and TBOGT in between the improvements warranted a new numbered entry.

Aswell as San Andreas somewhat, it's based on III/Vice but it has so many improvements it might almost have been a numbered entry.

V was still a huge leap graphically from IV

[Guest]

Maybe they decided to not continue numbering titles after GTA III. But then they can't come up with good title for Niko's story, that essentially reboots the series with new continuity, so they just say "f*ck it, name it GTA IV!" 

[The Journey]

1 hour ago, wise_man said:

Maybe they decided to not continue numbering titles after GTA III. But then they can't come up with good title for Niko's story, that essentially reboots the series with new continuity, so they just say "f*ck it, name it GTA IV!" 

They numbered it because it was a reboot. The theme song already has a name so if Niko’s story had a name like TLAD and TBOGT, it would prolly be “The Soviet Connection”.

 

The reason why Vice City and San Andreas aren’t numbered is because it’s all a big “Trilogy”, that expands a lot of GTA III characters and storylines. Kind of like prequels.

 

GTA V has characters from GTA IV but they aren’t important to the story like some GTA III characters are in VC and SA. GTA Online does this with GTA IV and GTA V characters, but up to you to decide if it actually counts .

Edited February 29, 2024 by The Journey

[Guest]

3 hours ago, wise_man said:

Maybe they decided to not continue numbering titles after GTA III. But then they can't come up with good title for Niko's story, that essentially reboots the series with new continuity, so they just say "f*ck it, name it GTA IV!" 

NGL the name of the game's theme song, "The Soviet Connection", would've sounded pretty badass if that was going to be in the game's title.

[almightyvasi]

From the same reason the newer Call of Duty's weren't continued as MW5, MW6 etc and so on, since they've taken the similar approach of recreating the storyline while still existing in the same universe under the same names.  I guess at this time where GTA gained popularity they brought in new writers and staff and gave them a free pass to redo the story however they like, "Our Game, Our Story" style 

Edited February 29, 2024 by almightyvasi

[Pashaforever]

They're just spin-offs that count as major entries in the series because they bring so much to the table. Think of Fallout New Vegas.

 

Fun fact: San Andreas was an inspiration as for what the devs wanted FNV to be in the Fallout series.

[Nico]

Vice City was originally meant to be a mission pack, an expasion for GTA III like the London 1961 and 1969 packs for GTA 1. Even if the game was great, I believe that because of its "game expansion" roots, they might have not considered it worthy of being a numbered entry to the series as it didn't quite represent a major techincal evolution from GTA III. It was developed in less than a year after all, while GTA III had been in the works since 1999 (I believe?). Still, the game was a success despite this and then San Andreas was the first GTA after III built from the ground up in a new version of the Renderware engine. SA did bring a big number of improvements, however in its case I believe they didn't choose the numbered route either because the game was still building upon the universe of III and VC. In fact, before the Stories games were a thing, SA was the game that properly connected the stories of the prior games and formed the original GTA trilogy.