Grand Theft Auto V

I'd rather it be something "new and exciting", but, I'd also like to see Los Santos in the GTA IV gameworld. If it is a nice sprawling game, like San Andreas was, I will be happy.

Also, Rockstar has never laid all their cards on the table as soon as they were dealt. Especially with the Grand Theft Auto franchise. It's amazing the first trailer showed this much, what with the studio's reputation for holding things in. I'd venture a guess that there is a lot that they're not telling us. There isn't even a release date, yet.

The American Dream story-line is getting a little old, but I can still enjoy myself playing it. Saving the world and saving the girl is old, too, but I still have fun saving the world.

I guess it boils down to what you want from the GTA world. I want to drive cars into people. I'm simple.

skeletonframes wrote:

I'd also like to see Los Santos in the GTA IV gameworld. If it is a nice sprawling game, like San Andreas was, I will be happy.

Taken out of context, but in a nutshell that's what I fear for video games, that all it becomes about a "HD updates" of older (can GTA:SA really be considered old?) games with a few little changes. This is a Red Queen's race, running as fast as you can to go nowhere.

Just watched the trailer. Looks pretty. I'm betting that it will start out with a great story like Read Dead did, or a decent story like GTAIV, but then fizzle out by the end to cater to "intense" gameplay setups (like Read Dead) or completely usher out any semblance of story or story-based gameplay (like GTAIV) for final gunfights full of lots of cops and exploding vehicles. You know what I mean-- it's a Rockstar game!

Scratched wrote:
skeletonframes wrote:

I'd also like to see Los Santos in the GTA IV gameworld. If it is a nice sprawling game, like San Andreas was, I will be happy.

Taken out of context, but in a nutshell that's what I fear for video games, that all it becomes about a "HD updates" of older (can GTA:SA really be considered old?) games with a few little changes. This is a Red Queen's race, running as fast as you can to go nowhere.

Also if you're being real this is GTA 9 (Vice City, San Andreas, Vice City Stories, Liberty City Stories, Chinatown Wars, GTA IV). This could be a problem of a series wearing out its welcome. Notice people had effusive praise for Bully and Red Dead Redemption. I think because, while similar, they went a completely different direction.

I don't see where they're going with this, it just seems like "more!" but what I want is "different!". I don't know that their game formula from GTA III even makes sense anymore. The kind of linear story they want to tell doesn't benefit from the open world, I even think they're conflicting design ideas. I don't want to spend another game just driving to mission givers and then driving to the mission. Lots of people still probably want that game but I think they need to reinvent it.

kyrieee wrote:

I don't see where they're going with this, it just seems like "more!" but what I want is "different!". I don't know that their game formula from GTA III even makes sense anymore. The kind of linear story they want to tell doesn't benefit from the open world, I even think they're conflicting design ideas. I don't want to spend another game just driving to mission givers and then driving to the mission. Lots of people still probably want that game but I think they need to reinvent it.

I would prefer something more like the factions you get in Fallout New Vegas. There's a story. But that story can meander depending on who you ally yourself with and the choices you make. This has always been my biggest problem with GTA. Especially post-San Andreas. I feel like the recent games have been about spending countless hours replaying non-checkpointed long meandering missions that generally fall in linear order with small deviations. I know many people love the "mature" Rockstar, but I wouldn't mind if they backed off on trying to create Hollywood-level commentary and just made great games with flexibility and great use of the open world.

I think it's telling that earlier in this thread someone said they'd rather have a 20 hour experience that was linear. There are definitely two forces at work here pulling at the game.

DSGamer wrote:
Scratched wrote:
skeletonframes wrote:

I'd also like to see Los Santos in the GTA IV gameworld. If it is a nice sprawling game, like San Andreas was, I will be happy.

Taken out of context, but in a nutshell that's what I fear for video games, that all it becomes about a "HD updates" of older (can GTA:SA really be considered old?) games with a few little changes. This is a Red Queen's race, running as fast as you can to go nowhere.

Also if you're being real this is GTA 9 (Vice City, San Andreas, Vice City Stories, Liberty City Stories, Chinatown Wars, GTA IV). This could be a problem of a series wearing out its welcome. Notice people had effusive praise for Bully and Red Dead Redemption. I think because, while similar, they went a completely different direction.

Plus DLC for IV. And I think I completely agree. At this point I think it's not that GTA has jumped the shark or anything, I'm just tired of the games and would rather play something else.

DSGamer wrote:

Also if you're being real this is GTA 9 (Vice City, San Andreas, Vice City Stories, Liberty City Stories, Chinatown Wars, GTA IV). This could be a problem of a series wearing out its welcome. Notice people had effusive praise for Bully and Red Dead Redemption. I think because, while similar, they went a completely different direction.

I agree about Vice City and San Andreas but not about the portable ones being deserving of a number.

Also I think that is Tommy Vercetti as well. Also looks like there was a brief cameo by Nico as a bum.

For all the people saying that this isn't novel enough and a little worn out, is that true for the majority of the people who will be buying the game, though? You know, the masses? Because Rockstar might be looking at the Call of Duty series and thinking that a bit of repetition isn't such a big deal.

I don't think that's Nico. That guy looks a little too old.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

For all the people saying that this isn't novel enough and a little worn out, is that true for the majority of the people who will be buying the game, though? You know, the masses? Because Rockstar might be looking at the Call of Duty series and thinking that a bit of repetition isn't such a big deal.

Honestly, for as much grief as Rockstar gets for being Big and Popular, repetition/complacency is just about the last thing I'd expect from them. Though GTA games all follow a formula (and the PSP games were revisits), R* has always managed to surprise us and offer up something we didn't even know we wanted. They stayed one step ahead of the game, so to speak. At least to me, anyway.

So with that type of expectation in mind, here's my gut-reaction take away.

Pre-trailer:

IMAGE(http://s3.amazonaws.com/kym-assets/photos/images/original/000/131/896/gaijin4koma2_peersblog_1200684608.jpg?1307579749)

Post-trailer

IMAGE(http://images2.fanpop.com/image/answers/259000/259997_1259297792651.03res_237_344.jpg)

IMAGE(http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/3423/2016986-screen_shot_2011_11_02_at_12.32.56_pm_super.png)

"Speedophile"
So it's more of that crap.
I'm out.

Wait for reviewers to call it "great satire!"

Mr E.B. Slugworth wrote:

I don't think that's Nico. That guy looks a little too old.

I thought the guy looked a bit like Ray Liotta. Which would fit with it possibly being Tommy Vercetti (as mentioned by Slyght up-thread).

kyrieee wrote:

IMAGE(http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/3423/2016986-screen_shot_2011_11_02_at_12.32.56_pm_super.png)

"Speedophile"
So it's more of that crap.
I'm out.

Hahaha. Yeah. That's a problem. Pisswasser... yuck yuck yuck.

Rockstar either has to shed this or embrace it, no? The thing that was refreshing about Saints Row 2 was that they went all in. So some of the humor actually worked.

Squeeeeeeeee!

ClockworkHouse wrote:

For all the people saying that this isn't novel enough and a little worn out, is that true for the majority of the people who will be buying the game, though? You know, the masses? Because Rockstar might be looking at the Call of Duty series and thinking that a bit of repetition isn't such a big deal.

True, but CoD lives off multiplayer. I feel like you can get away with that a little more with MP than SP. That could be my own personal bias though.

I bet they rob an institution holding large amounts of money in GTA5. Perhaps there will be dealings with a gang, maybe involving drugs, and the deal is ambushed by another gang, and the protagonist has to deal with the fallout. That would be great.

SallyNasty wrote:

I thought it was ridiculous to make a western game - had absolutely no interest in RDR until about a week before it came out, yet it because one of my favorite games every.

What I am saying is - r* makes a sassy product. Let's see where they go with it.

I was pretty interested in RDR but then I liked Gun. Which reminds me I am only lacking like 2 or 3 achievements in Gun.

I thought it was ridiculous to make a western game - had absolutely no interest in RDR until about a week before it came out, yet it because one of my favorite games ever.

What I am saying is - r* makes a sassy product. Let's see where they go with it.

SallyNasty wrote:

I thought it was ridiculous to make a western game - had absolutely no interest in RDR until about a week before it came out, yet it because one of my favorite games ever.

What I am saying is - r* makes a sassy product. Let's see where they go with it.

I'm happy to see where they go with it, but there was nothing "sassy" about that trailer, at all.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

For all the people saying that this isn't novel enough and a little worn out, is that true for the majority of the people who will be buying the game, though? You know, the masses? Because Rockstar might be looking at the Call of Duty series and thinking that a bit of repetition isn't such a big deal.

Rockstar has always managed to play to both sides, though - keeping in familiar mechanics and tropes while bringing in fresh characters and settings.

Well, I'm excited/reminded I've barely cracked GTAIV. Jets, dogs, recession, immigrant labour. Looking good so far.

The areas and variety of settings in San Andreas provided some of my favorite video game experiences and after watching this GTA V trailer, my excitement is MASSIVE. I hope I get to drive a combine once again.

I wonder if they'll do hot coffee again.

I noticed that the trailer seems to focus on contrasting scenes of wealth and poverty, and with the reference to money in the title it isn't too big a leap to assume that the current economic situation and the growing gap between classes will be central to the story.

Man tough crowd...

I'm not sure how to draw any conclusions about the actual game from this trailer but one thing is sure, it's freaking gorgeous! Looks much better than IV.

I'd be very curious to know what you guys - the disappointed ones - were expecting from this trailer?

ruhk wrote:

I noticed that the trailer seems to focus on contrasting scenes of wealth and poverty, and with the reference to money in the title it isn't too big a leap to assume that the current economic situation and the growing gap between classes will be central to the story.

Couldn't you just say that GTA is about crime, and one of the motivators for crime is redistribution of wealth between rich and poor. It doesn't need to be a present issue for them to do it, and it's pretty much an ever-present issue.

Really I'd say the 'modern era' GTA games have had less impact because they're too close (temporally) to the issues and themes they might cover. I'd say VC and SA are probably stronger because there's that distance to observe and make it a strong feature of the game.

I was happy to see an updated LC, but I'm much more excited about returning to SA. I loved SA from start to finish, and being able to see it looking so incredible will be a real treat. Sorry to see so many people bummed out. I guess I should feel grateful to remain excited after seeing the trailer.

mateofalcone wrote:

I guess I should feel grateful to remain excited after seeing the trailer.

That just seems like such an odd phrase to me for some reason.

I was hoping for a new setting.

EDIT:

Just to clarify, I'm not crushed or anything.

I'll still be getting it it Day One, etc.

I just wish they would have branched out into a fresh environment.

Scratched wrote:
mateofalcone wrote:

I guess I should feel grateful to remain excited after seeing the trailer.

That just seems like such an odd phrase to me for some reason.

It is an odd phrase, but it captures odd perplexity I feel at the heavy disappointment here following the trailer