Grand Theft Auto V

DC would be fantastic.

1790s DC. Grand Theft Carriage. Bring it Rockstar.

Except you'd have to call it Grand Theft Boat, 'cause DC was mostly a swamp back then.

IMAGE(http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OA/speeches/2003/ICR-Murano081903/Slide2.JPG)

Ever wonder what a GTA/Wind Waker mash-up might look like? See above.

Alas, my dreams of a GTA: New Orleans are shattered yet again.

Keep in mind that Rockstar doesn't use the actual names of the cities it's parodying in the GTA games, so if the style of the title is hinting at the setting, it could be anything... possibly the Vegas-inspired city of Las Venturas or an entirely new city that hasn't been mentioned yet.

On a side note:

gamepolitics[/url]]A friend of mine (a developer who will remain nameless) said that the Grand Theft Auto V announcement was oddly timed. I didn't understand what he meant at first until our readers and Twitter began mentioning that today's date coincides with the official start date of former Florida attorney Jack Thompson's disbarment date. On September 25, 2008, the Florida Supreme Court’s disbarment order for Thompson was signed. It went into effect 30 days later, on October 25, 2008.

I still think that Saints Row has better writing. GTA gets all the credit because it doesn't have a hotdog suit.

I think I'll watch a few Guy Ritchie movies and play Saints 3 instead.

As for the "V," it could be about robbing the National Mint (Philadelphia), or, y'know, just anything to do with money. Like every other GTA game ever.

LobsterMobster wrote:

I still think that Saints Row has better writing. GTA gets all the credit because it doesn't have a hotdog suit.

I think the problem is (for Volition/THQ) is that GTA is just a bigger brand, which says a lot about the "AAA" part of the industry where it's not so much about what game you make but how well know you are.

"Anonymous reports" from "people familiar with the game" have started floating around saying that V is taking place in Los Santos again, and will have multiple playable characters.

These are just rumors, mind you, so take them as you will.

I wonder if MS is going to pay them $50M timed exclusivity for DLC again.

Scratched wrote:

I wonder if MS is going to pay them $50M timed exclusivity for DLC again.

Technically, I think it was more like a $50M advance. Anyhow, I doubt it.

Wii U exclusive! You've read it here first!

Apollo0507 wrote:

Talking with a friend, I realize that while I enjoyed IV and thought it had the best presentation and story of all of the GTA games, I missed the interactivity of the city that San Andreas and Vice City had.

Engaging in gang wars, the ability to change CJ's appearance (beyond just outfit changes), upgrading my car, and the Oblivion-style leveling of abilities as you use them made me feel like I was leaving more of an imprint on the game world and the story. In Vice City, the property buying mechanic and the sense that you were taking over the city. IV felt very realistic and gritty and the city itself felt like an omnipresent character that Niko could not control, he could only hope to survive inside of it.

I'm hoping that V has more of the more dynamic interactive elements yet still tries to keep some of the great storytelling and style that IV had. I also realize that the interactive mechanics in San Andreas and Vice City lent themselves more to the story of the game (CJ was in a gang, so the gang wars made sense and Tommy was trying to run the city, so buying up properties and creating a gang empire made sense).

edit: It will be very interesting to see how Rockstar balances the styles of IV and San Andreas/Vice City in this game.

Having never gotten into a GTA game, my experience with IV was so great that I went back and played every title available on the PC. San Andreas's scope was madness - it felt more like an RPG with GTA mechanics than vice versa. Speaking of vice, I found that the improvements over GTA III in Vice City that resonated most with me were the RPG-ish elements (property ownership, etc). My favorite of the series is San Andreas by far, but I feel a significant attachment to GTA IV. The move toward realism was welcome, especially given the incredible fan-made graphical updates. It's the one game in the series that I've kept installed just for the sheer joy of driving around the city.

My greatest hope is that the evolution from IV to V will be similar to leap we saw from III/VC to Andreas. I'm sure there will be some improvements on the technical side, but I'm hoping to have more of an impact on the world as a whole. As I played San Andreas, it seemed to morph into a completely new game with every passing chapter - nicely book ended by a trip back to the hood. Maybe they will adapt the RAGE engine to that kind of experience. I would be thrilled to play a new game built on a slightly upgraded version of that engine if I could get the kind of experience they gave me in San Andreas.

Chalk me up as interested in a "Grand Theft Auto: Future", or a "Grand Theft Auto: Tokyo".

Either way, as long as they fix some of the jank and up the quality of the driving and gunplay, I'm down with it.

Tanglebones wrote:

I'd happily sacrifice some open-world weirdness and story length for a great 8-20 hour experience.

IMAGE(http://29.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kzzv6p709B1qzxzwwo1_500.jpg)

kyrieee wrote:

If they're going to attempt to tell a serious story this time then they need to cut the 'satire' and really improve the quality of the writing. I know some people enjoyed it but I though the writing in GTA IV was bad.

Quite bad. Very overwritten. Mafia 2 had superior dialog for a similarly themed story.

They need to decide if the game is over the top or not. Either Niko should be a tortured soul or he should be laughing and shouting one-liners as he guns/drives down innocent people. NOT BOTH!

ruhk wrote:

"Anonymous reports" from "people familiar with the game" have started floating around saying that V is taking place in Los Santos again, and will have multiple playable characters.

These are just rumors, mind you, so take them as you will.

Los Santos was more interesting to me than Liberty City, I actually finished San Andreas unlike the other GTAs, although that's probably more a symptom of having nothing else to play at the time. But I really wish they'd go outside their comfort zone of modern(ish) America. I'd love to see a British themed GTA, with a Guy Ritchie style plot.

Hell, anywhere else but the US would be nice. GTA: Sydney?

Redwing wrote:

GTA: Sydney? :P

It could set during the Australo-American War! Kamikaze kangaroos!

I think I'm in love with all of you right now. Yea, that felt weird when I typed it. But seriously, ditching the seriousness and getting back to the fun of Vice City and San Andreas is exactly where this next game needs to go. IV looked great, but it was the first time since the original I felt bored with a GTA game. The fact that everything was so funny (in a dark and twisted way) is precisely what made the series great.

I liked San Andreas but I did not like driving between the three cities. It needed a fast travel option. And I don't mean the airports; an option to move specific cars from one city to another.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

I liked San Andreas but I did not like driving between the three cities. It needed a fast travel option. And I don't mean the airports; an option to move specific cars from one city to another.

I felt that way until I was able to pilot. Then I just made a point of knowing where I could get my hands on a helicopter. The missions out of the airfield were some of my favorite in the the game.

Maybe if they return to such a vast world in V, they'll let us use a taxi like in IV. I admit that I ended up taking taxis a lot once my friends' demands on my time got out of hand.

Tag for future time investment

datawang wrote:

I think I'm in love with all of you right now. Yea, that felt weird when I typed it. But seriously, ditching the seriousness and getting back to the fun of Vice City and San Andreas is exactly where this next game needs to go. IV looked great, but it was the first time since the original I felt bored with a GTA game. The fact that everything was so funny (in a dark and twisted way) is precisely what made the series great.

I agree, the dark/absurd humor should definitely return in V. I'm really hoping that DC/Baltimore is chosen because there are so many absurd things that happen in this city that it would make sure such good satire. I know I'm biased because I live in DC and I am sure that plenty of other cities have their fair share of absurdities, but Marion Barry is still on DC City Council for Pete's sake!

I think there was also some casting calls that went out last year that heavily implied that they were working on another GTA game set in Los Santos? I'd be happy with either another Los Santos or a DC/Baltimore setting, as I currently live in the former and grew up in the latter. If they do another Los Santos game, they need to give the Valley some love.

I never finished GTA IV, I think I got as far as unlocking the New Jersey section of the map, which looks to be somewhere around 55-60% done according to what I just looked up online. The lack of mid-mission checkpoints drove me crazy. I heard that Lost and Damned introduced checkpoints, so I might give that and Ballad of Gay Tony a try (I just bought the GTA pack when it was on sale last week).

I am hoping instead of playing as one person for 20-30 hours it's like the liberty city stories where the 3 characters are in the same world and cross paths cause I felt the GTA4 story was too long but the Lost and the Damned was really good for 10 hours with new characters and some new game play elements.

LA, DC seem likely with the whole money thing or maybe it will be set in Liberty city again but 5 years into the future of GTA4.

I am really looking forward to the trailer even though it won't tell me much. I really liked San Andreas, GTA4 and the lost and the damned.

I think I am done with this series. I loved 3 and played it to death. I played a ton of VC. I played even more SA. Hell I even played quite a bit of Liberty City Stories when it was ported to PS2. I barely played 4 to completion though. I made it through the main story line and had had enough. I bought TL&TD and barely touched it. Unless they do something really different with this one I may skip it.

Rykin wrote:

I think I am done with this series. I loved 3 and played it to death. I played a ton of VC. I played even more SA. Hell I even played quite a bit of Liberty City Stories when it was ported to PS2. I barely played 4 to completion though. I made it through the main story line and had had enough. I bought TL&TD and barely touched it. Unless they do something really different with this one I may skip it.

That kind of echoes my feelings. To parallel my feelings with BF3, they need to remember that fun needs to be at the centre of what they do. I don't want to look at a bit of gameplay (in the case of BF3, unlocks) and think "work I need to do to get to the fun bit". There was just so much getting in the way in GTA4, and to a degree in GTA:SA.

Scratched wrote:

That kind of echoes my feelings. To parallel my feelings with BF3, they need to remember that fun needs to be at the centre of what they do. I don't want to look at a bit of gameplay (in the case of BF3, unlocks) and think "work I need to do to get to the fun bit". There was just so much getting in the way in GTA4, and to a degree in GTA:SA.

See I was having fun right off the bat in GTA:SA. The early parts of that game were so much fun. The opening part on the bikes was great. In fact I loved the bikes so much that I used them whenever I could. It was latter that the game started to drag. Guess I would be all over a Bully/GTA crossover. Bully: The Teen Gangbanger Years.

I think that if San Andreas had been twenty hours, all set in the first city, and focused on the street gang movies of the first hours, it could have been truly special. Why they felt the need to rob a casino in the same game as the story of CJ's growth and redemption, I'll never understand.

CptGlanton wrote:

I think that if San Andreas had been twenty hours, all set in the first city, and focused on the street gang movies of the first hours, it could have been truly special. Why they felt the need to rob a casino in the same game as the story of CJ's growth and redemption, I'll never understand.

I'll trump your casino robbery and play the Green Goo card

Yea everything after the first city and the street gang stuff was downhill. So much so that I would actually be down with them revisiting this setting/time but making it the whole focus of the game. No extra citys, no countryside, nothing but 90's gangsta rap and gangbangers in a fictional remake of 1990's LA.

Wouldn't mind seeing them take the series back to London either. Make the humor and stuff British instead of American.

I think I play GTA games differently than you guys. I want to know what's around every corner. I want to explore. I want to drive my car off a mountain.

I spent lots and lots and lots of time in GTA IV just watching peds bounce off the hood of my car. That's what I really love about them. Story is fine. I don't really care what they do with it, as long as they keep the things about the gameplay that I like and fix the things I don't like.

skeletonframes wrote:

I think I play GTA games differently than you guys. I want to know what's around every corner. I want to explore. I want to drive my car off a mountain.

I spent lots and lots and lots of time in GTA IV just watching peds bounce off the hood of my car. That's what I really love about them. Story is fine. I don't really care what they do with it, as long as they keep the things about the gameplay that I like and fix the things I don't like.

I love doing this in other games but the problem with GTA games is there is rarely any reward for exploring. At least in Fallout or Oblivion if I go way out of the way I am likely to at least find something interesting if not epic loot. The GTA games are like Miller Lite compared to the Guinness Extra Stout of some other open world games.