Imagine working for Rockstar Games right now. The work seems highly lucrative - the GTA series has sold over 30 million copies, with another game due in October.
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (http://www.rockstargames.com/sanandreas/)
There's no synopsis or screenshots, but who wants to bet that's Los Angeles? For all I know most of you have been chatting in various forums about this for quite some time - but I am really excited. I went back to playing GTA3 last night and only then realized how much Rockstar innovates between each game. It's not just a new city each time. The level of interaction in San Andreas should really be amazing.
Not to mention- Rockstar also has the whole Max Payne series (which I'm not quite as crazy about) and ALSO the upcomingRed Dead Revolver (http://www.rockstargames.com/reddeadrevolver/), the trailer of which is a cinematic masterpiece. Someone really studied their western films to get that look perfected.
Anyway, aside from gossip fanboy stuff- post here to discuss the future of gaming ala nonlinear environments and interaction. Eversince Omikron dissapointed me with its supposed "lifesize city of limitless interaction", I've been skeptical. But now it's looking like entire cities ARE being made, and one can just wander around in them. How long before gamers can actually knock on any door they want - and find a unique family sitting around a table eating dinner? Or interact with people not simply using violence? Shaking hands, conversing, eating, kissing, intercourse, etc.
Although most of these popular games are violent in nature, their popularity might bring opportunity for a new brand of adventure game one day. Imagine Vice City was a detective game where you solved crimes and there were no guns. With a certain amount of interaction, the entertainment would stilll be there.
San Andreas [as with Vice City] was in the original GTA.
It's a simulacra of San Francisco rather than LA, which is good, because San Francisco is prettier, and imagine driving around endless freeways in LA. yuck.
Los Angeles was used in True Crime. There was no way you could ever tell where the hell you were or where the hell you were going. Rockstar, so far, has made all the cities used in the GTA series easy to navigate, so I don't doubt that it will be the same way in San Andreas.
hehe las, you mean like Driver 1?
god that was a boring game...
I would write a whole bunch on nonlinear gaming that I have thought about but I find it pointless to do in a forum setting because I don't want to put a lot of thought into a post and then be ignored so I'll wait till Mittens when I can have a discussion with a lot of people and be ignored in person.
Message deleted.
True crime was crap//////
GTA vice city........pucker....
can it get any better...?
Manhunt was good....(a bit sick though......if you thought flashbax was
in bad taste......don`t play this..)
Rockstar is going to make it big with the new GTA. It was delayed something like 6 months because they wanted extra time to make it "The best game yet."
I've been shitting my pants waiting for the new VModule to come out. Completely 3D, much like 3DMax. Its gonna be great, if San Andreas doesnt already have a moddler.
EDIT: In regards to Dark, I remember reading something like they wern't even going to post screenshots until the game comes out, or something.
True Crime wasn't that bad, but not nearly as good as GTA3 or Vice City.
I had the most fun just wandering around Los Angeles in True Crime and beating up the locals.
Can't wait to see screen shots for the next GTA. Hopefully Rockstar will release some soon.
for those of you who have played True Crime. Did you notice alot of glitches? Like part of the ground disappearing for no reason? I'm just wondering if its my PS2 (the second one i had to buy)
San Francisco was also used in Midtown Madness, and it worked [as a city to drive in, the game was still boring].
I'd like to see them try the 60's East End again like they did with London 1969. That was fun if rather easy and short.
I wish they'd port Shenmue to PC.. Or make something similar.. That game was ace. Talk about wandering the city and interacting with EVERYONE!
Such a great game..
Hey!
I live in los angeles!
Sorry, I could'nt help myself.
I just had to represent!
Quote from: Dark-of-Night on Fri 26/03/2004 00:44:21
for those of you who have played True Crime. Did you notice alot of glitches? Like part of the ground disappearing for no reason? I'm just wondering if its my PS2 (the second one i had to buy)
I haven't played it, but I post on a professional 3d game modelling forum where they're constantly bitching about how hard the PS2 engine is to work with. I think it has to do with the way the triangles are arranged in the 3d world.
Max Payne was developed by Remedy from Finland, Rockstar was the publisher.
As for the discussion, I'm with eric on this one. As well I believe any discussion on the subject we might have will just be hopeful wishes which might possibly be realised many many years from now which doesn't really make me excited enough to talk about it.
Quote from: LilGryphMaster on Fri 26/03/2004 01:58:34
I wish they'd port Shenmue to PC.. Or make something similar.. That game was ace. Talk about wandering the city and interacting with EVERYONE!
Such a great game..
and yet there is... it's in our local store here. Great game!
Driver was revolutionary, in my mind. That last level with the president was tough as hell. The mode with just the police smashing you was great fun.
Felony 11-79 was alright but pretty much a linear track with a few shortcuts.
I once emailed Luxoflux after they released Vigilante 8. I had drawn and planned ideas for a sequel that combined driving and onfoot adventure. I still have the packet, the game was called Roadside Vengeance. But some guy from Luxoflux told me not to bother, they wouldn't even open it. Besides, "gamers don't like hybrid games" and he named off an example I had never heard of.
Now look at Luxoflux- only AFTER gta3 and vice, they develop True Crime. Good call dude.
That revolver trailer looks half decent...
I'm no fan of country-western games - normally I'd rather pour chilli-sauce over my genitals - but RockStar look like they can pull this one off okay.
As for the future of gaming, my idea of progress is being able to kick someone in the head and have them not retaliate....
*sweet*
Quote from: Las Naranjas on Fri 26/03/2004 00:25:39
San Andreas [as with Vice City] was in the original GTA.
It's a simulacra of San Francisco rather than LA, which is good, because San Francisco is prettier, and imagine driving around endless freeways in LA. yuck.
Oh hey. I'm fairly certain it will be a combination of San Francisco, LA, and other interesting burbs in california. I'm sure there will be one or two yucky highways but nothing too bad. We'll get the hills and the bridges of San Fran, and the sunset boulevard/ hollywood / slums part of Los Angeles.
Remember- we need slums becuase we need crime... becuase we need to justify shooting people. Slums which don't quite exist in SF. As far as gangs, Rockstar will probably offend just about everybody this time. Hispanics, blacks, asians, white trash, Hollywood heroine addicts, agents, homosexuals. It'll be great.
Some developer should make a game in a "simulacra" of Las Vegas. I guess GTA might get around to it despite the lack of water... but hell, they could make the story involve an artificial lake formed by a rupture in the Hoover Dam. If you're crazy about boats. "Holiday RoOOOOooooad! Hey look kids, Big Ben!"
I have to agree with Lord Gravity about The Sims 2. It seems like they are going all out with the sequel, and adding alot of interactivity. For instance, I saw a screenshot where a kid was there watering some plants, that looked like pot and in his thought bubble thing, he was thinking money... :P
Quote from: Dark-of-Night on Fri 26/03/2004 00:44:21for those of you who have played True Crime. Did you notice alot of glitches? Like part of the ground disappearing for no reason? I'm just wondering if its my PS2 (the second one i had to buy)
Yeah, I noticed that as well... I can't believe I bought the game though, I usually buy good games. :(
There's less slums to work with, but there's still lots of Triad and Hispanic crime stereotypes to work with.
And I'll guess they'll have fun with the gays as well, to be offensive as possible.
Especially the triads. Working for them was the most fun part of the original GTA.
--edit--
I should mention that I should have said Simulacrum, simulacra is the plural.
Hey, I have GTA 1. I think it is so funny. I've opened San Andreas and Vice City with cheat ;D
When the "Sin-City" rumours were flying about, I dreamt of a "Fear And Loathing in Las Vegas" kind of GTA, all glorious and seventies and stuff. And playing as a Hunter S. Thompson type character would make me happier than anything.
Davy
If anything, Rockstar will have a great GTA 6 in the "Sin City" idea, so they're good for quite awhile. :)
Another stupid reason to upgrade hardware?
Believe me, guys, this senseless "let's make everything 3D and nothing else than 3D" crap will stop someday. And it'll be a damn good day, IMO.
Yeah, and this Internet fad will pass soon as well.
Speaking of an avid fan of adventure games of the Sierra and LEC days, I really don't see a problem with 3D. I mean, what's the big deal? As long as the game itself is good, what's wrong with 3D? Everything is 3D nowadays and it's not going to stop. ANd upgrade hardware? My 32MB 3D video card and 256 MB of RAM are plenty for GTA:VC to run very smoothly, on its highest settings.
I really don't see the problem with having to upgrade video cards. It's been happening for some 10-odd years now, guys, having to upgrade video cards because newer games need more and more memory. It's a fact of computing that that will happen. Pretty soon I myself will have to upgrade, and I'm okay with that because it's a necessity.
I'd like a GTA 1950 type. or 1890... Wonder how that would be? Steal the chariots! go 20mph! "Hijack" a horse! Get hung!
GTA7: A day in the life of a caveman. Rockstar could make anything and people would buy it. Personaly I cant wait til they have a GTA lan setting, or internet missions or something. Now that would be fun. Just like a real mob.
GTA 8: BedRock City.
Just can't wait to get my hands to this cool Flintstones car... and running around with a grandfather of baseball bats.
yeow.
.. we haven't had GTA4 yet .. (vice was not 4)
Holy crap! I'm making a Flintstones car right now!!!
Puddin' - I've tried arguing that in the past and ultimatley it's just a worthless argument.
Vice was the fourth GTA release, and something tells me they won't number GTAs from now on. They'll simply name the game after the city. The only reason why gta3 should be named anything other than 'Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City' is that they built a new engine, etc.
but there won't be a gta4 anytime soon to confuse with vice, agreed?
There are: Gta, Gta london 1969, Gta 2, Gta 3, Gta Vice City. There are 5!
Isnt there two versions of 1?
GTA4 will come with new tech (probably next next gen consoles (ps3 etc), i'm sure
Right you are, but seeing as how Sony plans for the PS2 to last more than a decade, specifying between GTA Vice and GTA4 probably won't make a difference until 2009. :)
Yeah, we live in the age of insane numbering systems. GTA stopped being numbered after 3, so the entire argument is pointless. Then again, it might be a popular tendency to call Vice City GTA4, so let's all just jump on board the bandwagon, shall we? :P
GTA has registered Trademarks and Copyrights for the names and abbreviations of "Grand Theft Auto (GTA) 4 and 5 (As well as San Andreas, duh).. So either they are meant as working titles that can't be used by anyone else, or they're eventually going to make a 4 and 5.
So let's not continue fighting about this and let's just go on and play "GTA: One-Horse Town" and kill that damn sherrif for the thousandth time!
YEEE HAW
Hate bringing up this thread but... oh t'heck with it.
I've recently got san andreas for the PC. And I had loads of fun playing it. I love the athmosphere, everything. I especially love how I got it for the PC instead of any other platform, because of the mod possibilities. I've tried several mods already. Had loads of fun with them too. Favourite at the moment is the "get CJ high and drunk" mod. Which is not that impressive really, but if you've played through the game you know how much of a prissy goody-two shoes gangsta he is concidering all his other crimes. http://www.shadowreality.co.uk/images/13/untitled1.jpg oh how I love that moment.
Basically. I'm asking what everyone else finally thought of the game and how you played through it.
I also searched for san andreas and found no topic, so sorry if anyone is really angry at me right now :/
:D
Every forum has GTA: SA topic, no matter whatever the forum is about.
I didn't enjoy SA as much as Vice City, but as a hardcore GTA fan, I played patiently through it. Many things annoyed me, but there were good parts aswell.
Like easier missions. This game was half as difficult than other gtas.
Then again, some missions were unexplainably difficult, driving & flying school, anyone? Plane hijack mission? etc. They were completeable only when you had failed them fifty times and experienced enough during failure to do it.
I admit modding game in 2 missions and cheating once:
In the mission where fat guy shoots 4 enemies on train, well, using game's language, this nigga can't shoot for shit.
So, I modified weapons.cfg so TEC9 so the bullets killed almost instantly. It was much easier then.
In plane hijacking mission, i got tired of running whole route again and again to board the plane and fail, so I modded plane's speed handling.cfg to make plane meet other one faster and get some time to maneuver.
The mission in driving school, where you have to drive against time and keep car in mint condition was a bit easier using "less traffic" cheat code.
Once again, Rockstar decided to give main character mega weird personality, the guy kills hundreds of innocent people and still acts like some kind of hero... it's frightening.
The "film effect" thingy that they used in Manhunt (an excellent game, i must say) which was used for rainy weather in GTA:SA is a real annoyance, it slows computer down much and can't be disabled. I hated this the most.
as a hardcore Driver and DRIV3R (http://www.driv3r.com/) fan, i have to say that in the War between the GTA and Driver Series, they both come out on top in given fields. For example on one hand, Driver has been 3D straight from the start, but on the other, GTA has been around for longer. And on one hand, GTA:SA has loads and loads of weapons, but on the other, DRIV3R is more realistic as in real life, you wouldn't go outside and learn how to drive an Army Copter in about half an hour, nor would you find a purple dildo in your local police station to use as a weapon. But then, the Gta series has always been pretty tongue in cheek. But, like i said there is definitely a war between them, as viewed by 'The Driver' mission in GTA3.
San Andreas is totally fajawesome. I enjoyed the new additions such as more player customization, more planes, and a bit more story than usual. It was slightly buggy, but nothing terribly noticable. Parachuting kicks major boot-ay, probably my favorite advancement yet. Much, much bigger, as well. Though, at times, the distance I would need to travel to get from A to B was a little too great, but I don't see how that could really be avoidable. As for the next GTA installment, I'd very much like to see it take place in the 70's.
Now, is it just me, or are the cars faster this time around?
Flukeblake: There is absolutely no Driver/GTA war that I know of. Driver is not a very good series, and I doubt that "The Driver" mission is meant to be any real reference. And, I hate to drag this on, but what makes 3D so important? Not being 3D for its entire life span is not a negative point of the GTA series. 2D games can be okay, you know...
OPS2M Australia, November 2004.
QuoteThough, at times, the distance I would need to travel to get from A to B was a little too great, but I don't see how that could really be avoidable.
It scared me aswell at the first, but then I found a wonder recipe to travel across country:
1. Get a motorbike, the faster the better (cross bike is best for this)
2. Turn into direction of destination
3. Hold down "up" key*
4. if you end up in water, swim, get out, get another bike and keep pressing gas
* - the trees, mountains, etc are not obstacles. just go forth through, under and over everything and avoid roads. Bikes rarely blow up because fall damage (almost never) and easily go over any obstacle. Also, they're fast.
It was laughably easy then, and got easier after completing jetpack mission.
QuoteI doubt that "The Driver" mission is meant to be any real reference.
Is that the mission where you have to kill an undercover cop called 'Tanner', who's described as 'strangely animated'? No, I doubt that's a 'Driver' reference.
but, then the Driver series struck back with the fact that in Driv3r there are 10 characters in each city called Timmy Vermicelli, based on Tommy Vercetti, which you have to kill. And, because you cannot swim in any gta game other than san andreas, Timmy wears floaties.
yes but then rockstar north struck back by making a good game :P
touche. but Driver 3 was a pretty good game.
HAHAHAHAHA.
Both games suck. Only a gangstatard would enjoy them.
They spawn gangsta wannabes who copy lines directly from both series and spout them off during school. Damn, if I wasn't such a pathetic stick I'd rip out their brains and donate them to science in a last-ditch attempt to cure stupidity.
Bah.
Really? I enjoy the GTA series and I'm not "gangster".
I think thats called "generalisation". I also think its stupid.
One less brain I guess. Oh well, they will find that cure for you one day.
And plus, the game styles are different from GTA and Driver.
GTA is an Urban-Style Crim Sim, while Driver has a more "slick hollywood" feel.
oh, and i agree with hotspot. pfff.... gangsta.
Quote from: Blitzerland on Thu 14/07/2005 01:35:40
Both games suck. Only a gangstatard would enjoy them.
They spawn gangsta wannabes who copy lines directly from both series and spout them off during school. Damn, if I wasn't such a pathetic stick I'd rip out their brains and donate them to science in a last-ditch attempt to cure stupidity.
Bah.
That is one of the most ridiculous posts I've seen on this forum. I know fifteen or so people who have played GTA games and none of them are even slightly "gangster". None of them ever "spout off lines" from the game.
My guess is the people who do are too young (and immature) to be playing the games anyway.
I agree dg, though the overall attitude in GTA:SA annoyed me a bit. While other GTA games are witty and neutral, playing off like a good crime movie, in GTA:SA It seemed like all the characters praise the whole gangsta crap a bit too much.
All this pimpin' and ganstarapping fashion thing that's seen so much on TV nowadays (and discussed so much at these forums) came into mind while playing this game.
Anyway, if there's some game to blame, it's clearly and only GTA:SA.
Jesus Christ, it's a parody.
What AGA said. I'm annoyed by the "gangstarapping" attitude in real life, but I had a laugh playing GTA:SA.
QuoteThat is one of the most ridiculous posts I've seen on this forum. I know fifteen or so people who have played GTA games and none of them are even slightly "gangster". None of them ever "spout off lines" from the game.
My guess is the people who do are too young (and immature) to be playing the games anyway.
Because we deal with different groups of people...makes my post ridiculous? No matter. Just because our experiences differ is no reason to flame.
And I'm talking about 15-16 year old teens. Trust me, it doesn't get any more annoying than that.
QuoteOne less brain I guess. Oh well, they will find that cure for you one day.
Had to edit that in, didn't you? Unneccessary, but not unprovoked. You would be a GTA:SA fan, yes?
QuoteJesus Christ, it's a parody.
At the risk of becoming a walking cliche:
I know that. You know that. But they, the average joe gangsta-wannabe, don't know that.
Anyways, ever seen/read/pretended to read the play, "Merchant of Venice?" Back in it's day, the general populace thought Shakespeare was mocking Shylock and his ilk, when really he was almost sympathizing with him.
Sometimes people misinterprete things.
I enjoyed all the GTA games. Vice City was and will always be the best, though.
I thought San Andreas was quite good too. There was much more things to do and the city's were huge.
But I always liked the idea of a parody of the 80's action tv-shows better.
For the record, I never said it wasn't a good game. PCGamer gave it an Editor's Choice a month or so ago. That said, I wouldn't touch it with an electronic, remotely-operated-from-antartica-fifty-foot pole.
I just hate the way it seems to spawn gangster-wannabes, and the game's premise disgusts me.
Quote from: Blitzerland on Thu 14/07/2005 01:35:40
Both games suck. Only a gangstatard would enjoy them.
Yes, you did. And the group of people you were talking about was everyone that liked it.
Caught me there. Let me rephrase.
I do think both games suck, as in, I wouldn't enjoy playing them and neither would anybody I'm on good terms with, but I won't deny they are very high-quality and well-made. San Andreas had no less than 300 voice actors, you know.
If my best friend were to go out and purchase a copy, I wouldn't say anything. If said friend started acting like a gangster shortly afterwards, and having no prior history of doing so, I'd blame the game.
I've known two normal (as in, easygoing, pleasant) people turn...mean...in the course of a week. All they ever do now is play GTA, talk about GTA, diss anybody that doesn't like GTA, etc. There really is such a thing as being too young for a game.
Obviously I'm preaching to the wrong choir. The average age on these forums is what, 20? I'm talking about 15-16 year old Freshmen and Sophmores. Hotspot, you probably have no idea/have never experienced what I'm talking about.
Ohhh I have. I'm 17 just left Secondary school in the UK a year ago. The kids in that school did my damn head in ¬¬
So...you do know what I'm talking about.
What the flip are you on about, then? Sheesh. You've experienced it.
It was mainly this part that I think was ridiculous:
Quote from: Blitzerland on Thu 14/07/2005 01:35:40
Both games suck. Only a gangstatard would enjoy them.
It was insulting to me and any other person who enjoys the game. If you don't like the game then fair enough don't play it.
Like I said before it's people who are too immature to be playing the game that will act like asses because of playing it.
QuoteLike I said before it's people who are too immature to be playing the game that will act like asses because of playing it.
I agree completly. That said, It still pisses me off to have to listen to all the messed-up crap at school, and it
really pisses me off when the few people that can "handle it" say something along the lines of, "it's just the immature people that get messed up by it, don't make a fuss about it."
Those "immature people" consist of nearly everyone in my entire cursed school, then. GTA, GTA, GTA. Do these people ever go outside? They aren't gangsters. They're sociopathic failures. And they'll grow up to be the "mature" people of tommorow.
It's too late to do anything about it, I guess, so I might as well shut up and leave you all alone. My apologies for digging up an old topic.
Quote from: Blitzerland on Thu 14/07/2005 01:35:40
Both games suck. Only a gangstatard would enjoy them.
Half Life sucks. Only people who have PhDs in theoretical science will enjoy it.
Halo sucks. Only people who are space soldiers will enjoy it.
Monkey Island sucks. Only pirates enjoy them (but then again, that's most of us ... )
...
...
etc.
Don't be a dumbass, Blitzerland.
Not only have you (probably on purpose) totally missed the point here...
Quote Quoth myself: That said, It still pisses me off to have to listen to all the messed-up crap at school, and it really pisses me off when the few people that can "handle it" say something along the lines of, "it's just the immature people that get messed up by it, don't make a fuss about it."
Those "immature people" consist of nearly everyone in my entire cursed school, then. GTA, GTA, GTA. Do these people ever go outside? They aren't gangsters. They're sociopathic failures. And they'll grow up to be the "mature" people of tommorow.
This is why I don't like GTA. Obviously, nobody agrees with me and the entire forum now utterly despises me so I'll just leave. Surely I am the Lord of Unpopular Opinions.
We get it, zor justs likes to tack his "2 cents" on ¬¬
Quote from: Hotspot on Fri 15/07/2005 15:22:55
We get it, zor justs likes to tack his "2 cents" on ¬¬
Well, actually it's my more like 47 cents ;D
In canadian pennies.
Anyways, I hope I didn't offend anyone too badly. My opinion still stands, but I'll try to use more tact in the future.
I've never taken the GTA series seriously. I remember playing GTA2 like crazy at a friends house a good number of years ago. We never cared for the missions, and just went crazy, like most people probably did. Yesterday, I played San Andreas with the same friend on his XBOX. Only this time we dressed him up like hick, drove a mountain bike up to the highest mountain, and jumped off. With the bike. It was hilarious.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say, is that GTA's success probably goes with the "do whatever you want" factor. And the unrealistic physics.
We don't have gangsta wannabes here, fortunately... And I find the GTA series hilarious. I wouldn't mind if GTA stayed the same and only gave a new different city with different missions.
For the next GTA I hope they use the atmosphere of GTA 2 because I really loved that one.
On gameplay only, GTA 1 and 2 easily was more fun then San Andreas. Also, one of you said that GTA can turn someone into a 'ganstarappin gta lover'. Partly True. It's like Futurama, with the Brain Spawn. The 'stupid' effect works on everyone except Fry, as he lacks a delta brain wave. Well, for gta, of course more people are immune to gta's "effects". But, like an old friend of mine, some are not. Now, whenever i ask him what he is doing while i talk to him on MSN, all he says is 'playin san andreas'.
Let's hope that Rockstar Games can work on a GTA series that has more civilised- mafia style violence and style.
I'm Blake Gallagher, and that was my two cents.
Driver turned all my friends into undercover cops.
Bu' I though' you waz gangsta.
Personally I think video games don't have much of an effect on people, unless they let it. Im sure GTA is no more to blame for "wannabe gangsters" than MTV!!
Could I just use up some valuable bandwidth to rant about morals and such?
Why is it that nobody blinks an eye when a game is released in which you play a gangsta and kill dozens upon dozens of people, but as soon as a tiny bit of sex is discovered a full scale media riot ensues?
Sex between consenting adults (virtual or of the meat variety) is a GOOD thing in my book. Killing people is a BAD thing (to me).
Is it just me or do we seem to have our priorities the wrong way around?
Well, every incarnation of the GTA games have been the target of angry mothers' and politicians' inane rantings because of the violence. Suddenly there's a GTA game with just as much violence as the previous games, but with sex scenes that you have to download a third-party program to access, and all the whining is about those sex scenes.
I'd like to think that the whiners have learned a lesson that moaning about the violence doesn't work. I'm afraid they're just stupid though, thinking that sex is worse than violence.
Not that portrayal of any of those two is bad.