Map Expansions?

[Jason]

On 12/21/2023 at 5:44 AM, PolandMountain said:

I might be wrong, but I think the code development itself takes the most time, and you can't speed it up just by hiring a lot of new workers. They might end up getting in each other's way instead of helping. Especially since training new people would take a few years at least.

 

Maps are basically just a bunch of 3D assets. I believe that adding more people to work on assets could make things go faster without slowing down other ongoing game developments. This could mean getting maps out more quickly compared to the time it takes to make a whole new GTA game (with a map expansion every two years).

 

AFAIK this is not really true. Not saying that writing the code for AAA games isn't time consuming, cause it obviously is, but asset creation is, generally speaking, by far the biggest time sink from what I understand. Beyond the lack of availability of 8k TV's, this is also why there's serious no push from Sony/MS or any other studio to make 8K gaming a thing because it would be an insane bump to the amount of time it takes to create assets, further increasing the time it takes to make games.

 

In regards to map expansions... It's inevitable, IMO. They literally tried it with GTAO1 despite having to play ball with massive tech limitations on the PS4/XB1, and it remains one of if not the number 1 on fans most wanted list for DLC/expansions for GTAO.

 

The only question I think there is would be how do they do it, do they add new islands or expand the vanilla landmass? I think I've said in other threads that the northern part of the map could give us an idea of that. If the north coast of the map is barren and is mainly just shoreline and hills then that could suggest the vanilla map will be expanded, where as if the northern coast has a lot of detail, like say a town/city on the coast and things like that, it could potentially point to them adding islands instead.

 

It could be either one, but if I had to make just a random wild guess I'd probably say they'll go for extending the vanilla landmass option because that way they can add to the map bit by bit in a way that feels a bit more natural, vs adding load of islands. That way they can add new smaller parts to the map more frequently, without having to add anything significant every time, like adding new cities or whatever, which would be by far away the most time consuming thing to do.

[Zapper]

On 12/19/2023 at 3:38 AM, PauloJz said:

Times are different and we are unlikely to have an Online 2.0 that explodes as much as the old one (I hope).

This gives us players the opportunity to receive a single player expansion or two.

 

Uhh, R* will just move on to the next game. Think for yourself: RDR2 sold over 57m copies to date. RDO didn't explode like GTAO, understandably due to the genre and time period. So, did they make any story expansions? They just moved on to GTAVI.

 

There is simply zero incentive for R* to invest in story expansions at all since it'll never, ever bring in anywhere near the revenue of a brand-new game or GTAO, even though it'll cost a fortune to develop, like $100m+ and 2-3 years.

 

It goes without saying that post-launch map expansions are solely on the cards to increase the longevity of GTAO, and if you're lucky, R* can potentially add a small story campaign with them to bridge the gap between releases, the latter of which is wishful thinking at best at this stage.

[PauloJz]

8 minutes ago, Zapper said:

 

Uhh, R* will just move on to the next game. Think for yourself: RDR2 sold over 57m copies to date. RDO didn't explode like GTAO, understandably due to the genre and time period. So, did they make any story expansions? They just moved on to GTAVI.

 

There is simply zero incentive for R* to invest in story expansions at all since it'll never, ever bring in anywhere near the revenue of a brand-new game or GTAO, even though it'll cost a fortune to develop, like $100m+ and 2-3 years.

 

It goes without saying that post-launch map expansions are solely on the cards to increase the longevity of GTAO, and if you're lucky, R* can potentially add a small story campaign with them to bridge the gap between releases, the latter of which is wishful thinking at best at this stage.

I hope Schreier's article is right about reducing the crisis in DLC's. In any case, receiving a work of art in the base game, with a considerably large map, full of interactions and thousands of details that can surpass GTA SA and even RDR2, I would be more than satisfied.

[grafftistain]

On 12/18/2023 at 7:14 PM, Octane said:

This is the last GTA game for the next 10-15 years at minimum. And the leaks and early development was code named "Project Americas", so I wouldn't be too surprised if over the course of it's lifecycle we see different map additions or expansions.

true and that title does imply they was/are planning to implement South American and Caribbean cities. 

 

I’m having my hopes for at least 

 

Havana, Cuba

Kingston, Jamaica

 

 

[Zapper]

30 minutes ago, PauloJz said:

I hope Schreier's article is right about reducing the crisis in DLC's. In any case, receiving a work of art in the base game, with a considerably large map, full of interactions and thousands of details that can surpass GTA SA and even RDR2, I would be more than satisfied.

 

That's pretty much a given. This is what Schreier himself said about the game last year, which does hold true when you see the leaked 'Events List' and community mapping efforts:

 

And as for post-launch plans, Schreier's words are correct, but they're just a snapshot of time. Those plans might and can change, even in ways R* themselves don't see yet.

[SMC TBane]

Is it possible that R* can make a full fledged city for GTAVI Online every 3+ years at the same time working on a different game? 
 

that’s what Jason Schneider said it’s rockstars plan. Is that bs or possible.

 

and if it’s possible. How can they make a lot of money from it? End of the day, it’s a company what wants money. 

[N6VEMBER]

On 12/22/2023 at 8:11 AM, Jason said:

 

AFAIK this is not really true. Not saying that writing the code for AAA games isn't time consuming, cause it obviously is, but asset creation is, generally speaking, by far the biggest time sink from what I understand. Beyond the lack of availability of 8k TV's, this is also why there's serious no push from Sony/MS or any other studio to make 8K gaming a thing because it would be an insane bump to the amount of time it takes to create assets, further increasing the time it takes to make games.

 

In regards to map expansions... It's inevitable, IMO. They literally tried it with GTAO1 despite having to play ball with massive tech limitations on the PS4/XB1, and it remains one of if not the number 1 on fans most wanted list for DLC/expansions for GTAO.

 

The only question I think there is would be how do they do it, do they add new islands or expand the vanilla landmass? I think I've said in other threads that the northern part of the map could give us an idea of that. If the north coast of the map is barren and is mainly just shoreline and hills then that could suggest the vanilla map will be expanded, where as if the northern coast has a lot of detail, like say a town/city on the coast and things like that, it could potentially point to them adding islands instead.

 

It could be either one, but if I had to make just a random wild guess I'd probably say they'll go for extending the vanilla landmass option because that way they can add to the map bit by bit in a way that feels a bit more natural, vs adding load of islands. That way they can add new smaller parts to the map more frequently, without having to add anything significant every time, like adding new cities or whatever, which would be by far away the most time consuming thing to do.

If you want to be technical, the amount of time development takes across all job categories is arbitrary. Game development is a pipeline process so if an asset gets as far as texture mapping or rigging/animation , and there's a problem with the topology or vertex count issue, that asset gets sent back to the 3D artist to correct it. An asset could be complete but then a game designer could want to add a feature to that asset, example: they model a generic garbage bin with a lid, but after its been finished they decide that particular model needs to open and store objects so you can hide a body or something like that. On the programming side, the engine is already there for them so they have a head start in a way, but a good amount of their work is correctional, and for GTA 5 at least, most of that work was done after the release. Adding new areas to the same landmass could cause a lot of technical issues that breaks the whole game, if they were to have separate islands that you load into similar to Cayo Perico, then its more possible to contain those issues should there be any. We are definitely leaps ahead of where we were back in 2013 with technology and creative talent, but there are still a lot of limitations, with a large economic recession in flux, money being the main one. Watching a lot of studios pare down and cancel games, I don't think Rockstar will hire more people, and they recently made a lot of workplace culture changes to prevent overwork and crunch, if we get expansions in the way of new locations they will very likely be few and far between **Unless** these locations are already being worked on right now and they each have their own smaller teams to focus on completing them, but I would be pleasantly surprised if that were the case.

 

On 12/22/2023 at 8:20 AM, Zapper said:

 

Uhh, R* will just move on to the next game. Think for yourself: RDR2 sold over 57m copies to date. RDO didn't explode like GTAO, understandably due to the genre and time period. So, did they make any story expansions? They just moved on to GTAVI.

 

There is simply zero incentive for R* to invest in story expansions at all since it'll never, ever bring in anywhere near the revenue of a brand-new game or GTAO, even though it'll cost a fortune to develop, like $100m+ and 2-3 years.

 

It goes without saying that post-launch map expansions are solely on the cards to increase the longevity of GTAO, and if you're lucky, R* can potentially add a small story campaign with them to bridge the gap between releases, the latter of which is wishful thinking at best at this stage.

 

Take Two Interactive is going to be a the front of their long term direction, we have seen multiple cancelled live service games in the last while, and a lot of poor reception for other live service games. GTA Online was a unique early live service experience in a lot of ways, and with the changing nature of how that kind of game is received could be enough for them to shift focus to creating whole contained experiences rather then momentary "fast content", especially since they can charge money for a story expansion. I wouldn't rule it out.

13 hours ago, SMC TBane said:

Is it possible that R* can make a full fledged city for GTAVI Online every 3+ years at the same time working on a different game? 
 

that’s what Jason Schneider said it’s rockstars plan. Is that bs or possible.

 

and if it’s possible. How can they make a lot of money from it? End of the day, it’s a company what wants money. 

If they continue the trend of starting production on their next game (likely RDR3 due to the well received single player of RDR2, or a completely new IP), and likely a large game at that, they will have a lot of their preliminary role employees busy (Game design, talent acquisition, geographically researchers, art leads for art design and direction, etc). The employees you need to work on assets and such would be available until full development kicks in, but the time between then and the launch of GTA6 is not easily determined. Rockstar has somewhere close to 2500-3000 across all of their studios, I imagine if there is an online mode then that will have a designated team, there will also be a team that focuses on porting the game to PC, but I imagine those will be done by a smaller studio (GTA 5 on PC was mainly handled by Rockstar Toronto). There's a good amount of employees and a fair amount of time that they could do more work for GTA 6 in, but if I were to put money on it, they would do the majority of the work for all expansions within the first 2-3 years post launch and then stagger the release of them, any bugs/issues would fall onto the team maintaining GTA6/GTA6O.

[SMC TBane]

Now that GTA5 source code is leaked. The LC en North Yankton expansions were real and its cancelend for V.

 

Do you guys think we will get it both on VI?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, SMC TBane said:

Now that GTA5 source code is leaked. The LC en North Yankton expansions were real and its cancelend for V.

 

Do you guys think we will get it both on VI?

Yes. I hope. 
Not NY though. Ludendorff is too small for anything 

[rjmthe2nd]

9 minutes ago, SMC TBane said:

Now that GTA5 source code is leaked. The LC en North Yankton expansions were real and its cancelend for V.

 

Do you guys think we will get it both on VI?

I don't see how that would work if they're just going to place it somewhere on the map.  If it's like SA where you have go to the airport to get there and back, perfect.

Edited December 25, 2023 by rjmthe2nd

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, rjmthe2nd said:

I don't see how that would work if they're just going to place it somewhere on the map.  If it's like SA where you have go to the airport to get there and back, cool.

Maybe longer prologue in Liberty City? 
Too ambitious? Probably yes.

Too cool? f*ck yeah! 

[rjmthe2nd]

Just now, ErosPista said:

Maybe longer prologue in Liberty City? 
Too ambitious? Probably yes.

Too cool? f*ck yeah! 

 

Im assuming that means having an extra map to run around in, not just for a couple of missions.

 

 

Making it only accessible via airport could help loading an entire map instead of having it just there for you to swim, fly or drive a boat to manually.

 

The one thing they can do with a return to Liberty City is snow

 

 

RDR2 snow physics in Liberty City  

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, rjmthe2nd said:

 

Im assuming that means having an extra map to run around in, not just for a couple of missions.

 

 

Making it only accessible via airport could help loading an entire map instead of having it just there for you to swim, fly or drive a boat to manually.

 

The one thing they can do with a return to Liberty City is snow

 

 

RDR2 snow physics in Liberty City  

Well i’m hoping for a long-ass story. Something that takes me like a year to complete. 
I think my very first casual 100% of GTA V took me 3 months. 
In my hopium fueled speculation, LC surely fits in there.

And snow would be the cherry on top 

[rjmthe2nd]

6 minutes ago, ErosPista said:

Well i’m hoping for a long-ass story. Something that takes me like a year to complete. 
I think my very first casual 100% of GTA V took me 3 months. 
In my hopium fueled speculation, LC surely fits in there.

And snow would be the cherry on top 

 

 

There's still hope something is still very unknown about GTA 6.

 

 

Whether that be other states, third protagonist after one of the two (or both) die

 

Wouldn't even say it's hopium, remember how RDR 2 threw everyone off with that Caribbean segment in Guarma, fighting a Cuban militia while being assisted by a Haitian rebel

 

 

I'm expecting something like that to subvert us again 

[N6VEMBER]

6 hours ago, SMC TBane said:

Now that GTA5 source code is leaked. The LC en North Yankton expansions were real and its cancelend for V.

 

Do you guys think we will get it both on VI?

It's tough to see how they work it into the story but its very possible for online. Maybe perhaps if it were for single player it could focus on one character (liberty fits Lucia best and i can see Jason in north yankton) that way, regardless of how the story ends, you can still have these add-ons be as canon as possible.

[rjmthe2nd]

2 hours ago, N6VEMBER said:

It's tough to see how they work it into the story but its very possible for online. Maybe perhaps if it were for single player it could focus on one character (liberty fits Lucia best and i can see Jason in north yankton) that way, regardless of how the story ends, you can still have these add-ons be as canon as possible.

If there's a break up chapter or maybe a "lay low" situation where they split for a couple of months that'd be good 

[MajorMinor81]

Based on nothing but "Project Americas" being a working codename for VI, I want to believe that we will get Carcer City, Las Venturas, North Yankton, Liberty State, San Andreas. Maybe DLCs, and maybe more locations.

[LitlleKuba]

On 12/12/2023 at 7:03 PM, Emmi said:

It's a tough call. On one hand I want to see them making a Liberty City expansion in GTA VI on the other hand I want to see an even better Liberty City in GTA 7.   Why not both?

Sooner or Later we will 100% back to Liberty City, Rockstar and fans love this city

On 12/12/2023 at 9:13 PM, wqx said:

People here over-interpreting into what Jason Schreier said about "map expansions". What he said could mean new buildings with new interiors like the casino in LS we have got or an additional island like Cayo which both we have got in GTA V's online.

 

I don't think that we'll ever get a fully-fledged city like Liberty City as a map expansion. They'll probably and hopefully increase quality and scale of these expansions like seamless entering of interiors and seamless traveling to these locations, but a whole city requires way too much time and resources for them. It's better to just work on the next game then.

I saw before that Tez good explain what Jason mean with that

On 12/12/2023 at 9:27 PM, Dostoyevskiy said:

"Rockstar's plan is now to continually update the game over time, adding new missions and cities on a regular basis, which the leadership hopes will lead to less crunch during the game's final months." bruh

It was report from 2019 if I good remember, some stuff might change 

Edited December 29, 2023 by LitlleKuba

[LitlleKuba]

On 12/22/2023 at 3:22 PM, Zapper said:

 

That's pretty much a given. This is what Schreier himself said about the game last year, which does hold true when you see the leaked 'Events List' and community mapping efforts:

 

And as for post-launch plans, Schreier's words are correct, but they're just a snapshot of time. Those plans might and can change, even in ways R* themselves don't see yet.

Yeah, since his report about it was in Early 2019

On 12/23/2023 at 2:48 AM, SMC TBane said:

Is it possible that R* can make a full fledged city for GTAVI Online every 3+ years at the same time working on a different game? 
 

that’s what Jason Schneider said it’s rockstars plan. Is that bs or possible.

 

and if it’s possible. How can they make a lot of money from it? End of the day, it’s a company what wants money. 

After premiere is obv that majority of devs will move to next big game, what will be most likely next Red Dead

[LitlleKuba]

On 12/23/2023 at 4:16 PM, N6VEMBER said:

If you want to be technical, the amount of time development takes across all job categories is arbitrary. Game development is a pipeline process so if an asset gets as far as texture mapping or rigging/animation , and there's a problem with the topology or vertex count issue, that asset gets sent back to the 3D artist to correct it. An asset could be complete but then a game designer could want to add a feature to that asset, example: they model a generic garbage bin with a lid, but after its been finished they decide that particular model needs to open and store objects so you can hide a body or something like that. On the programming side, the engine is already there for them so they have a head start in a way, but a good amount of their work is correctional, and for GTA 5 at least, most of that work was done after the release. Adding new areas to the same landmass could cause a lot of technical issues that breaks the whole game, if they were to have separate islands that you load into similar to Cayo Perico, then its more possible to contain those issues should there be any. We are definitely leaps ahead of where we were back in 2013 with technology and creative talent, but there are still a lot of limitations, with a large economic recession in flux, money being the main one. Watching a lot of studios pare down and cancel games, I don't think Rockstar will hire more people, and they recently made a lot of workplace culture changes to prevent overwork and crunch, if we get expansions in the way of new locations they will very likely be few and far between **Unless** these locations are already being worked on right now and they each have their own smaller teams to focus on completing them, but I would be pleasantly surprised if that were the case.

 

 

Take Two Interactive is going to be a the front of their long term direction, we have seen multiple cancelled live service games in the last while, and a lot of poor reception for other live service games. GTA Online was a unique early live service experience in a lot of ways, and with the changing nature of how that kind of game is received could be enough for them to shift focus to creating whole contained experiences rather then momentary "fast content", especially since they can charge money for a story expansion. I wouldn't rule it out.

If they continue the trend of starting production on their next game (likely RDR3 due to the well received single player of RDR2, or a completely new IP), and likely a large game at that, they will have a lot of their preliminary role employees busy (Game design, talent acquisition, geographically researchers, art leads for art design and direction, etc). The employees you need to work on assets and such would be available until full development kicks in, but the time between then and the launch of GTA6 is not easily determined. Rockstar has somewhere close to 2500-3000 across all of their studios, I imagine if there is an online mode then that will have a designated team, there will also be a team that focuses on porting the game to PC, but I imagine those will be done by a smaller studio (GTA 5 on PC was mainly handled by Rockstar Toronto). There's a good amount of employees and a fair amount of time that they could do more work for GTA 6 in, but if I were to put money on it, they would do the majority of the work for all expansions within the first 2-3 years post launch and then stagger the release of them, any bugs/issues would fall onto the team maintaining GTA6/GTA6O.

They will also for sure port GTA VI to PS6 and Next Xbox

[Jimbatron]

On 12/22/2023 at 1:11 PM, Jason said:

 

 

 

It could be either one, but if I had to make just a random wild guess I'd probably say they'll go for extending the vanilla landmass option because that way they can add to the map bit by bit in a way that feels a bit more natural, vs adding load of islands. That way they can add new smaller parts to the map more frequently, without having to add anything significant every time, like adding new cities or whatever, which would be by far away the most time consuming thing to do.

I agree it feels more natural but my hunch is that they will go with additional islands as it offers more flexibility to solve practical challenges.

 

If you’re going for major map expansions (eg an extra city), that’s difficult to justify the investment unless you charge for it as a bought game expansion. But then what do you do if not everyone buys it - does that risk splitting the Online player base?

 

The solution with adding an extra island is that you can have your cake and eat it.

 

Players who have bought the map expansion can fly from one to the other - but other players who haven’t bought it would see them disappear off the edge of their visible map.

 

I think this is effectively what happens with Cayo Perico where (I could be wrong but) I think when you go to do the scope out you’re actually still in the same session as any players you leave behind in Los Santos - even though you can’t see each other or interact. The only difference with a map expansion is you’d want the transit to be smooth and seamless.

 

With a connected landmass this is obviously much harder to achieve. What’s the barrier that one player can’t even see that stops another from progressing? With water, you can use the GTA V dynamic of engines cutting out and shark spawning at the edge of the map. There are still some practical considerations - what happens if you’re in a plane or boat with another player who hasn’t bought the expansion and can’t go there? Maybe you get a warning and you’re engines still cut out if you have a passenger.

 

It’s not as natural as what you’re saying, but as above, I think otherwise you have to give it away for free, or you split the player base. Or change the way you monetise the game entirely like making it compulsory subscription based - but that’d be a bold move to go beyond the optional GTA+ imho.

[Zapper]

12 hours ago, LitlleKuba said:

It was report from 2019 if I good remember, some stuff might change 

 

No. He initially reported about it in early-2020, but he doubled down on it as late as mid-2022. The following excerpt is from the latter report:

Quote

The game’s new map is now focused on a fictional version of Miami and its surrounding areas. Rockstar’s plan is to continually update the game over time, adding new missions and cities on a regular basis, which leadership hopes will lead to less crunch during the game’s final months.

 

[Jason]

19 minutes ago, Jimbatron said:

I agree it feels more natural but my hunch is that they will go with additional islands as it offers more flexibility to solve practical challenges.

 

If you’re going for major map expansions (eg an extra city), that’s difficult to justify the investment unless you charge for it as a bought game expansion. But then what do you do if not everyone buys it - does that risk splitting the Online player base?

 

The solution with adding an extra island is that you can have your cake and eat it.

 

Players who have bought the map expansion can fly from one to the other - but other players who haven’t bought it would see them disappear off the edge of their visible map.

 

I think this is effectively what happens with Cayo Perico where (I could be wrong but) I think when you go to do the scope out you’re actually still in the same session as any players you leave behind in Los Santos - even though you can’t see each other or interact. The only difference with a map expansion is you’d want the transit to be smooth and seamless.

 

With a connected landmass this is obviously much harder to achieve. What’s the barrier that one player can’t even see that stops another from progressing? With water, you can use the GTA V dynamic of engines cutting out and shark spawning at the edge of the map. There are still some practical considerations - what happens if you’re in a plane or boat with another player who hasn’t bought the expansion and can’t go there? Maybe you get a warning and you’re engines still cut out if you have a passenger.

 

It’s not as natural as what you’re saying, but as above, I think otherwise you have to give it away for free, or you split the player base. Or change the way you monetise the game entirely like making it compulsory subscription based - but that’d be a bold move to go beyond the optional GTA+ imho.

 

I know what you're saying, but I'm not sure I agree that approach would be them having their cake and eating it. I've said this before on the idea of map expansions being instanced islands that I think that would split up the playerbase much more significantly, as the new map would be the new content thus everyone would have to play on it for the new content. I've played games that have went this route in the past and it creates what the devs of  that game (Warframe) called "content islands", and they're a pretty bad problem to have 5-6 years down the line. It'd also mean that long term R* would have to develop content for all the new islands, one at a time, rather than being able to utilise a larger interconnected world - another issue the Warframe developers have had.

 

Also R* themselves said years ago that the reason they don't charge for GTAO content is to avoid splitting up the userbase too.

 

My guess, if they went with landmass expansions, would be that the map would be free in GTAO2. You might not be able to partake in all the content there as perhaps that requires a purchase (even then I dunno), but yea.

 

IF they went that route they may tie map expansions together with GTA VI SP DLC.... IF, I know their track record for SP DLC for a good while now is that they don't do it, but it would be a possible route to help cover the cost of a full map expansion.

 

That being said, when I think of GTAO map expansions I don't necessarily think of them adding a new city or town every time, but perhaps smaller new areas every now and then, with the bigger updates like towns and cities being rarer.

[Jimbatron]

11 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

 

 

My guess, if they went with landmass expansions, would be that the map would be free in GTAO2. You might not be able to partake in all the content there as perhaps that requires a purchase (even then I dunno), but yea.

 

 

Yes something like that might work. Including presumably a new SP story you only get if you buy etc.

 

One thing for sure though, it requires a lot of thought to do it right (both to be commercially viable and not to be disruptive to players), as there are so many different ways to implement it, each with their pros and cons. Obviously I’m sure R* will have invested significant time in exploring possibilities but I’m really curious as to what they’ll go with.

[lngtrw]

I would die for a Brazilian map expansion

[Jimbatron]

18 minutes ago, lngtrw said:

I would die for a Brazilian map expansion

Having lived there for 15 years I’d love it if they did London again (first time post top down version anyway). It does run into the problem in the UK you don’t have the equivalent of the 2nd amendment in the USA - quite the opposite - which stretches credibility to breaking point if you have people running around the streets with fully automatic assault rifles, even in a parody.

 

Then again if they base it off a universe where someone like Suella Braverman becomes PM, maybe it’s on trajectory.

[VCPDofficer]

1 hour ago, Jimbatron said:

Having lived there for 15 years I’d love it if they did London again (first time post top down version anyway). It does run into the problem in the UK you don’t have the equivalent of the 2nd amendment in the USA - quite the opposite - which stretches credibility to breaking point if you have people running around the streets with fully automatic assault rifles, even in a parody.

 

Then again if they base it off a universe where someone like Suella Braverman becomes PM, maybe it’s on trajectory.

I’d love a small DLC or something set in the UK.

 

Knives/swords as primary weapons wouldn’t work. But, it would be cool having characters running around with sawed-off shotguns, Skorpions and a small number of semi-auto 9mms.

 

I’ve been doing a bit of research into the UK lately, and a lot of recent high-profile murders were committed using firearms. The firearms tend to be old weapons such as Skorpions or recommissioned revolvers.

[Jimbatron]

1 hour ago, LSPDofficer said:

I’d love a small DLC or something set in the UK.

 

Knives/swords as primary weapons wouldn’t work. But, it would be cool having characters running around with sawed-off shotguns, Skorpions and a small number of semi-auto 9mms.

 

I’ve been doing a bit of research into the UK lately, and a lot of recent high-profile murders were committed using firearms. The firearms tend to be old weapons such as Skorpions or recommissioned revolvers.

Where it might work is possibly as an island where effectively you and (non police) AI have less weapons. So depending on where you go you have a different style of play. So anyone going there is limited to handguns and sawn offs - no M4 carbines etc.

 

I don’t think they could sell a whole GTA without OTT weapons now - but with extra cities and an expanded map, an area with weapon restrictions could work and provide and extra challenge.

[Agent Edward]

A good place for Rockstar to make a world expansion based on it would be Maine during the winter, it would be a good contrast to Florida during the summer that we're getting with GTA6's main world from day one, showcasing the most recent version of RAGE in a completely different environment. There are other reasons for me to choose this location and I'll explain them later when I'm free.

 

 

 

 

Now, how would a Story Mode DLC work in a completely different location? Probably with brand new protagonists, since there's no reason for Jason and Lucia to move from Leonida to another state if they make it big there.

Edited December 30, 2023 by Agent Edward

[chnlk]

I think that Rockstar will create new maps and add them to the new Online for free. BUT, I believe that at the same time, they will use these maps in new SP only games. Not GTA VII or VIII, but titled releases (like GTA SA or VC).

 

Though of course, in Online you will need to teleport to these new maps, and there won’t even be a SP game with them all.

Because of that, I think that after a few map expansions, they will take all of them, refresh them, connect all of them by land and use that combined map in GTA VII - a completely new SP and MP game (just like GTA VI now)