GTA V Pre-release Discussion - ***DO NOT POST SPOILERS*** (Mod warning in first post)

wnolan1992

wnolan1992 wrote: »

If that I could. I could never get my pilot's licence, so I never made it past the desert.

Yeah you'd want to do that now, man. The new regulations brought out since IV are making it a bit more difficult to pass the test and I hear that when V comes out, you'll need to have done a specific number of lessons first. :pac:



The news that it's only going to be Los Santos is gravely disappointing.

SA as per its original incarnation on PS2, being redone on a whole new graphical level, that'd be great. LS on its own, another hustling and bustling, packed tight city, with a mountain beside it for the sake of letting people have their free roam area; I'm not really that bothered about.

I'd say that was a hard announcement for R* to make, seen as they obviously only said it because they realised everyone was fully expecting the whole SA Map, and didn't want people to be disappointed when they seen the second advert. I'd rather a proper Vice City than a poor man's San Andreas.


I have no idea why they didn't just do a whole new city. If they weren't going to put the effort into making it as good as it was almost a decade ago, then they shouldn't have used the same name again. A map containing just Los Santos will never seem complete to people who played, and loved, the original San Andreas. Poor move, Rockstar. Very poor move, indeed.

I think they're going to struggle to build up the big hype they had before they made that announcement. Seems a lot of people are upset.

As one of the comments says on the R* page;

"Rockstar's biggest and most ambitious game? You mean except for the one they made 8 years ago?"


Also got a chuckle from this post on GTA Forums:

"Part of what made the countryside so much fun in S.A. was the feeling that i was travelling somewhere, i had a destination to get too. i was taking the "scenic route." if i just have one city, then what the hell am i doing in the country? just had to get away? "chillin on a dirt road, laid back swervin like im george jones?" lol

thats just me personally though..."




He's got a point, though.

Zero-Cool

Deleted User wrote: »

"Part of what made the countryside so much fun in S.A. was the feeling that i was travelling somewhere, i had a destination to get too. i was taking the "scenic route.".

Completely agree! If I had to get to SF from LS, I would always go down by the country side, round Mt. Chiliad and then onto SF just because it was fun to drive it. It's way too early to tell what R* have planned so will just have to wait and see. I think that pic showing the For Sale sign and 2405 def means 24th May. I just hopes its 2012!

jd007

Well fuck thats disappointing. I was certain it was gonna be the 3 cities

SV

I've never been disappointed by a GTA game.

Rockstar know what they're doing and I trust them to do good

johndoe99

SV wrote: »

I've never been disappointed by a GTA game.

Rockstar know what they're doing and I trust them to do good

i've never seen a bad GTA game either , of course they'll be, they should of had this and that. But they can't make every single gamer happy. I like the fact the game is so long, i wish all games were as long, and i like the Free Paly, where you can roam the city running pedestrians over in your car being chased by the cops, just brilliant.

5T3PH3N

jd007 wrote: »

Well fuck thats disappointing. I was certain it was gonna be the 3 cities

I'm expecting to see another trailer showing the rest of the map the day before Saints Row 3 comes out:p

wnolan1992

5T3PH3N wrote: »

I'm expecting to see another trailer showing the rest of the map the day before Saints Row 3 comes out:p

That would be devilishly brilliant!!!

Plug

Bit of a kick up the stones:(

Well they do say its the biggest ever so maybe the country side will be a lot bigger than San Andreas with a dozen or so towns dotted around. That won't be too bad, however if they were planning on doing one city it should have been Vice City, the bastards, made my life a misery, Im Plug from boards:mad:*dives out window*

maquiladora

Deleted User wrote: »

Reading that quite a lot and I hope it's not true.

I don't think Rockstar are that bad, are they? Their DLC for IV wasn't very conjob-ish in nature, so I reckon they won't try pulling that one on people.

Towards the end of the trailer, at 1:03, the landscape shot it shows, you can see pretty much the entirety of Los Santos and as it's cityscape rolls into the background, there's a fairly busy four lane motorway leaving the city to the left of the screen.

I doubt they'd put a motorway like that to a mountain, so I'm assuming it's to one of the other cities.

Los Santos looks massive and there is better detail and better looking textures here than in GTA IV. How the heck would they fit another 2 cities, plus even more countryside with that level of detail onto an Xbox 360 disc? Multiple discs then, but who wants to swap discs driving from one part of the map to the other? Thats why I think the other areas might be DLC, the data for those can be saved on the HDD. It would mean that those people with old 360's that dont have the storage space will miss out of that DLC, but thats the only way I can see them having the full San Andreas map within the limitations of the 360 discs.
Also might explain why we don't see any other city apart from Los Santos in the trailer.

Testament1

maquiladora wrote: »

Los Santos looks massive and there is better detail and better looking textures here than in GTA IV. How the heck would they fit another 2 cities, plus even more countryside with that level of detail onto an Xbox 360 disc? Multiple discs then, but who wants to swap discs driving from one part of the map to the other? Thats why I think the other areas might be DLC, the data for those can be saved on the HDD. It would mean that those people with old 360's that dont have the storage space will miss out of that DLC, but thats the only way I can see them having the full San Andreas map within the limitations of the 360 discs.
Also might explain why we don't see any other city apart from Los Santos in the trailer.

Normally I dont care about which consoles people think are better and all that but in this case all I can say is fuck ye 360 owners for depriving us of a full SA map :mad::p

glenjamin

Just saw the trailer. Looks amazing. Completely fine pair of boxers ruined from excitement. Need to wear a nappy when I get the game.

maquiladora

Testament1 wrote: »

Normally I dont care about which consoles people think are better and all that but in this case all I can say is fuck ye 360 owners for depriving us of a full SA map :mad::p

At the end of the day its business, and R* will want to make to the most money by selling the game to everyone with a PS360. DLC is not something that everyone buys though so its not as big a deal if the minority with old consoles dont have the storage for it.

Roll on the next generation of consoles!

maquiladora

maquiladora wrote: »

Los Santos looks massive and there is better detail and better looking textures here than in GTA IV. How the heck would they fit another 2 cities, plus even more countryside with that level of detail onto an Xbox 360 disc? Multiple discs then, but who wants to swap discs driving from one part of the map to the other? Thats why I think the other areas might be DLC, the data for those can be saved on the HDD. It would mean that those people with old 360's that dont have the storage space will miss out of that DLC, but thats the only way I can see them having the full San Andreas map within the limitations of the 360 discs.
Also might explain why we don't see any other city apart from Los Santos in the trailer.

I think it's been done before. Apparently you can get a 3disc game and install them to the HDD. You just need to have a disc in to play the game and the xbox will load from the other discs saved to the hard drive.

Not sure what game, but those on GTAForums reckon the consoles aren't what's holding it back, but rather time/budget constraints.


Anyway, it's nothing new. They did it before. (I know what you're going to say: it wasn't as detailed back then, and there's a lot more detail in it now, and that's true, but they also have greatly improved consoles to do it on this time, too, so it balances out, i'd imagine).


I don't particularly care how big the map is, if it just consists of a load of dead space. Where's the fun in that? People got tired of IV, and although i still love IV, i was looking forward to a break away from the dreary dull world of Liberty City. Now, though, it seems V is just more of the same, again.

Icyseanfitz

im still holding out hope for more than one city, i think rockstar is just fcuking with us tbh, their very good at this kind of marketing

maquiladora

Spot the difference :P

Icyseanfitz

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

im still holding out hope for more than one city, i think rockstar is just fcuking with us tbh, their very good at this kind of marketing

I'd normally agree, but I don't think so. It's not really like them to come out with an announcement just saying where the game is set. If they had all of SA in there and wanted people to be shocked or surprised they'd have just left it alone and let people argue and obsess for another month or two about whether or not it's the whole SA State.


Coming out with an announcement, 'raining on everyones parade' (as they say) and hindering the hype for their upcoming game, isn't a clever move, I'm sure.


I'd like to think we'll see one of the other two cities in the next trailer, but i don't think so.

Nuri Sahin

Only just got around to watching IGN Review Theater. I know what Rockstar have been quoted as saying and all but, just regarding the Los Puerta Fwy highway sign @ 3.57 in the vid. IRL it connects LA and San Francisco. Bit odd if the it really is true that Los Santos is the only proper city to feature then and have that motorway. I'm sure they can have altered it if they wanted to so to rule out San Fierro.

Then the wind farm in the next shot @ 4.14, again IRL it connects LA and San Francisco. It's along Highway 5 (Los Puerta) too - http://maps.google.com/?q=Altamont+pass

Now obviously, in a GTA universe not everything is going to be exactly depicted in real life and I'm clutching at straws perhaps. Hopefully I'am not. I just want 2 or 3 cities god dammit! :pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7oXcFVz2YE

maquiladora

Deleted User wrote: »

I think it's been done before. Apparently you can get a 3disc game and install them to the HDD. You just need to have a disc in to play the game and the xbox will load from the other discs saved to the hard drive.

The old 360 Core and Arcade models don't have any HDD.

R* would not want to limit their market by selling a game that people that still have those models couldn't play.

profitius

There'll be more than one urban area. If not more cities there'll be some towns at least.

senordingdong

maquiladora wrote: »

Spot the difference :P

I don't get it, is the inferior shot lifted from Vice City?

GTAV is looking good alright.

Mister Dread

maquiladora wrote: »

The old 360 Core and Arcade models don't have any HDD.

R* would not want to limit their market by selling a game that people that still have those models couldn't play.

Thats a fairly insignifcant market segment when you think of all the proper xboxs and ps3s.

I was pretty excited about GTA4. It was looking really good until I played it. Looked like **** and played like it. If they keep up the same car mechanics I won't even bother with this.

Somnus

Major disappointment if it's only Los Santos.

As someone said earlier, for anyone who's played San Andreas it will feel like a let down.

And for those who are saying how could they build a map that big in the detail shown there: Think back to San Andreas. Most people I know couldn't believe the size of the map. It was gargantuan. It added in proper flyable planes. It had car mods and avatar customisation. It removed the loading screens between islands. It was a ridiculously huge step up.

I don't see any reason why they can't do something similar 7 years later with the next gen hardware...

Mister Dread

Mister Dread wrote: »

Thats a fairly insignifcant market segment when you think of all the proper xboxs and ps3s.

I was pretty excited about GTA4. It was looking really good until I played it. Looked like **** and played like it. If they keep up the same car mechanics I won't even bother with this.

yeah god forbid cars actually take a bit of skill to drive...

Mister Dread

The handling wasn't fun, wasn't intuitive and wasn't realistic. The worst of all worlds.

Mister Dread

Mister Dread wrote: »

The handling wasn't fun, wasn't intuitive and wasn't realistic. The worst of all worlds.

Thought it was perfect, myself, to be honest.


So long as they keep it as far away from LA Noire's handling as possible, I'll be happy. What a disastrous effort that was!

J. Marston

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah you'd want to do that now, man. The new regulations brought out since IV are making it a bit more difficult to pass the test and I hear that when V comes out, you'll need to have done a specific number of lessons first. :pac:



The news that it's only going to be Los Santos is gravely disappointing.

SA as per its original incarnation on PS2, being redone on a whole new graphical level, that'd be great. LS on its own, another hustling and bustling, packed tight city, with a mountain beside it for the sake of letting people have their free roam area; I'm not really that bothered about.

I'd say that was a hard announcement for R* to make, seen as they obviously only said it because they realised everyone was fully expecting the whole SA Map, and didn't want people to be disappointed when they seen the second advert. I'd rather a proper Vice City than a poor man's San Andreas.


I have no idea why they didn't just do a whole new city. If they weren't going to put the effort into making it as good as it was almost a decade ago, then they shouldn't have used the same name again. A map containing just Los Santos will never seem complete to people who played, and loved, the original San Andreas. Poor move, Rockstar. Very poor move, indeed.

I think they're going to struggle to build up the big hype they had before they made that announcement. Seems a lot of people are upset.

As one of the comments says on the R* page;

"Rockstar's biggest and most ambitious game? You mean except for the one they made 8 years ago?"


Also got a chuckle from this post on GTA Forums:

"Part of what made the countryside so much fun in S.A. was the feeling that i was travelling somewhere, i had a destination to get too. i was taking the "scenic route." if i just have one city, then what the hell am i doing in the country? just had to get away? "chillin on a dirt road, laid back swervin like im george jones?" lol

thats just me personally though..."

He's got a point, though.

That's a good point. Unless you're forced to travel out there for missions, will people actually pay any attention to the the countryside if there is nothing beyond it?

Icyseanfitz

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd normally agree, but I don't think so. It's not really like them to come out with an announcement just saying where the game is set. If they had all of SA in there and wanted people to be shocked or surprised they'd have just left it alone and let people argue and obsess for another month or two about whether or not it's the whole SA State.


Coming out with an announcement, 'raining on everyones parade' (as they say) and hindering the hype for their upcoming game, isn't a clever move, I'm sure.


I'd like to think we'll see one of the other two cities in the next trailer, but i don't think so.

im holding off saying one thing or another until i see the second trailer, if thats in los santos then yeah it probably is only the one city, i dont know that statement rockstar gave is worded in a way that they could say yeah we said the city of los santos but we also said Southern California which includes such and such

Benzino

Dr.Poca wrote: »

Major disappointment if it's only Los Santos.
And for those who are saying how could they build a map that big in the detail shown there: Think back to San Andreas. Most people I know couldn't believe the size of the map. It was gargantuan. It added in proper flyable planes. It had car mods and avatar customisation. It removed the loading screens between islands. It was a ridiculously huge step up.

I don't see any reason why they can't do something similar 7 years later with the next gen hardware...

Textures alone is a reason as to why they wouldn't be able to do it. Textures are the number one memory hog for pretty much every game. I wouldn't be surprised at all if a texture in GTA 4 was 10 times (or even more) larger than that of San Andreas. After all, most games are expected to run in FULL HD nowadays.

EdenHazard

GTA V is meant to be 2.5 times bigger than RDR accordinng to some french magazine. there is a thing on another gta forum and it shows the scale of gta v which indicates the game will be massive, theres a shot where you see the mountains far far into the distance.

my only thing is i hope that fatty white guy isnt the main guy, it will just look dumb bmxing around with him, i wanna some mexican youth!!!

py2006

What was the gap between the first GTA4 trailer and the official release?