Gta Iv

robinph

Some details on the upcoming GTA game:

clicky

shortys94

What, no planes! I was looking forward to online mayhem with players crashing into each other and parachuting out before impact.
They say realistic, but does that mean the game will still be fun?

Royale with Cheese

They say they want realism, which I believe to a certain extent. But my take on it is that they're taking elements out of the game on purpose just so they can add extra things into the sequel. If they did it all in GTA IV then the sequel would be criticised for being more of the same whilst adding nothing new to what GTA IV had.

~Marky~

No jetpack I loved the jetpack oh well life goes on..

Kanney

There is a gta iv board you know

Karmafaerie

They were told not to use plans by their lawyers I heard.
With the city being so similar to New York, they didn't want people flying planes into buildings.
Plus with the real damage elements, buildings would be destroyed and that woulf F**k up the game.

niall2j

I was a massive GTA3/VC/SA fan when I had them on PS2... read the article above there & saw the trailer a while back. It seems to be shaping up real nice.

I'm wondering what they can add though beyond whats been done. Obviously the graphics should be top notch, but the general presentation already was. Any ideas as to how they're gonna bring it into the 'next gen'? Someone mentioned destructible environments above, which would be interesting. I like the sound of the episodic content too, but would that represent the 'leap forward' that we would hope for?

Kanney

niall2j wrote:

I was a massive GTA3/VC/SA fan when I had them on PS2... read the article above there & saw the trailer a while back. It seems to be shaping up real nice.

I'm wondering what they can add though beyond whats been done. Obviously the graphics should be top notch, but the general presentation already was. Any ideas as to how they're gonna bring it into the 'next gen'? Someone mentioned destructible environments above, which would be interesting. I like the sound of the episodic content too, but would that represent the 'leap forward' that we would hope for?

Episodic content, Multiplayer (proper), Destructible environment, Rag Doll physics and Hot Coffee...
Well all except the last one.

Karmafaerie

Kanney wrote:

Episodic content, Multiplayer (proper), Destructible environment, Rag Doll physics and Hot Coffee...
Well all except the last one.

You're not thinking big enough!;)

Forget rag doll, and wrap your mind around Euphoria

While Rockstar have refused to comment, it's believed that this is the engine that their Rage engine is based on.

No two actions are ever the same, you shoot a plane of glass 100 times and it'll break differently every time.

Plus player movement is effected.
You walk slower uphill, if you're carrying something you move more sluggishly, if you're shot in the leg you move with a limp, there's a physical weight on your character when they push something, or open a door!

This is how GTA IV is gonna be Next-gen!:D

Kanney

Yeah I've seen Euphoria in action and I'm not clicking that link again because I dont want to ruin another perfectly good pair of pants..
Too late..

muggibar

it looks unreal in the star wars demo on youtube there class just imagining the possibilities, makes mowing down pedestrians much more interesting.

Ciaran500

Karmafaerie wrote:

They were told not to use plans by their lawyers I heard.
With the city being so similar to New York, they didn't want people flying planes into buildings.
Plus with the real damage elements, buildings would be destroyed and that woulf F**k up the game.

You can't destroy buildings and they had no problems including planes in San Andreas or the Liberty City of GTA3

humanji

Ciaran500 wrote:

You can't destroy buildings and they had no problems including planes in San Andreas or the Liberty City of GTA3

Well it's the fact that the city is modelled after New York, it seems they felt it'd be insensitive of them. And sure the planes were crap anyway.

RobertFoster

humanji wrote:

Well it's the fact that the city is modelled after New York, it seems they felt it'd be insensitive of them. And sure the planes were crap anyway.

Yes, helicopters are much better. And that jetpack thing...pfft, too slow and no radio.

Karmafaerie

Ciaran500 wrote:

You can't destroy buildings and they had no problems including planes in San Andreas or the Liberty City of GTA3

What Humanji said.

Don't forget, GTA 3 was supposed to have a functioning plane, but they cliped the Dodo's wings so to speak after 9/11.

Makaveli

You could still fly it although it took a lot of practice and patience.

Ciaran500

Karmafaerie wrote:

Don't forget, GTA 3 was supposed to have a functioning plane, but they cliped the Dodo's wings so to speak after 9/11.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTA_3#Cuts.2C_changes.2C_and_the_9.2F11_effect - "However, the plane has, for months before 9/11, had a short wingspan, as evidenced from a preview in Game Informer (Issue #95), which indicated that the plane was to be used in a (now abandoned) mission to loft the plane high enough in its brief flight and reach new areas of the city."

thebman

I've flown the Dodo for over 2 minutes in the first GTA. The only reason it was that short was because I hit a building.

It flies in GTA 3 but anyway there is nowhere to go.

The Sparrow

The Dodo was great in GTA III! I used it in one of the last missions when you had to go to the airport and shoot down a plane and collect all of the drugs it dropped and go back to the construction site. You immediately got 5 (i think?) stars and it was really difficult to drive back to the construction site. But I flew back using the dodo which was much easier!

the corpo

hey, does anyone know if xbox san andreas will load on the 360? tempted to find a 2ndhand copy

Kanney

Its on the backwards compatibility list. Should work.

the corpo

cool, wonder if i can nab it for cheap in town

cheers

Karmafaerie

Ciaran500 wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTA_3#Cuts.2C_changes.2C_and_the_9.2F11_effect - "However, the plane has, for months before 9/11, had a short wingspan, as evidenced from a preview in Game Informer (Issue #95), which indicated that the plane was to be used in a (now abandoned) mission to loft the plane high enough in its brief flight and reach new areas of the city."

That's simply somebodies guess.
(You should know better than to thrust wikipedia:rolleyes: )

The Dodo had a small wingspan always, but it was supposed to be much, much, easier to fly.
The were never ordered to cut that aspect out, but chose to themselves, on short notice just in case.

There were still a load of complaints a few years later when VC was released with planes, but at that stage more time had passed.

Makaveli

You could never destroy buildings though. If you hit one you bounced off it and crashed into the ground.

I know IV is set in New York but I still think we should be allowed to fly planes. Is it insensitive? I don't think so. People are shot everyday in New York, should guns be removed from the game too?

[edit]That question isn't aimed directly at anybody on the thread.[/edit]

Ciaran500

Karmafaerie wrote:

That's simply somebodies guess.
(You should know better than to thrust wikipedia:rolleyes: )

The Dodo had a small wingspan always, but it was supposed to be much, much, easier to fly.
The were never ordered to cut that aspect out, but chose to themselves, on short notice just in case.

http://www.gouranga.com/nf-info-gta3.htm
It has been confirmed that the helicopter and planes cannot be flown by the player, they are strictly used by the AI. The only flying vehicle available to the player is a damaged Cessna (missing most of its wingspan). This plane is made available during a mission and it only flies for short amount of time (it's really only capable of jumping off the ground in short spurts).

Doesn't sound like it was done for 911, where's your proof?

Makaveli wrote:

I know IV is set in New York but I still think we should be allowed to fly planes. Is it insensitive? I don't think so. People are shot everyday in New York, should guns be removed from the game too?

[edit]That question isn't aimed directly at anybody on the thread.[/edit]

I agree with their decision TBH, taking a plane to fly around one city doesn't really fit in with the setting and there will still be helicopters. Which is much more reasonable for city travel.

Makaveli

I suppose that's fair enough. It's not like San Andreas where you had to cover three cities.

Nephew

Kind of off topic but how does San Andreas on the xbox compare to the pc version? I have had it on the pc since release but only played it for a couple of hours due to the discomfort of sitting at the pc, half tempted on buying it for the 360.