Grand Theft Auto V has been officially announced by Rockstar this afternoon, with industry whispers continuing to suggest that the fifth open-world instalment could be set to make the switch to a real-world city - specifically, Los Angeles.
With the cash appearance of the Roman Numeral V, Vegas is a good guess. Although they already did something of a vegas take in San Andreas.
A city I've been hoping for that this could be ... DC ... probably the most iconic looking city in the US with all the monuments. An incredibly unique map layout for the city. And there's so much you can do with the plotlines of corrupt politicians, in addition to an extremely violent criminal underbelly in DC.
You can't tell me you wouldn't look forward to doing to crack run for Capitol City's Mayor Barry Marion.
I'd love to see them do an international one too. Rio would be ****ing awesome.
Anyway. I liked the fourth one. My favorite remains Vice City. I really feel like the biggest issue with the fourth one was that they didn't give it an era to cling to. That's half the point of Vice City and San Andreas, not just these charicatures of the cities, but the ability to do this parody of an era.
The City in the IV was awesome. More alive than the others. But it lacked a lot of the ironic takes on society the games are known for. The Ballad of Gay Tony sort of hit on the club scene, and that was awesome. Probably the best part about the game was the Gay Tony DLC.
I liked GTA 4 a lot for its story, characters and overall look but it was just missing that charm and gameplay variety of GTA San Andreas (IMO, the best in the series). Liberty City was kind of a boring location and GTA is always good when there is a bit of humour mixed in with all the crime.
I remember the first time you could drive in between Los Santos and San Fiero and check out some of the stuff in between the cities, it was an awesome feeling.
GTA 4 was a good game. 3, VC, and SA were amazing games.
Rockstar took a direction they'd never cared about before, focusing on graphics. So much content was removed from the previous games it's not even funny.
If it didn't have the GTA name to it it would have faired much better with the general gaming community.
GTA games are expected to be classics, 4 certainly was not.
Ballard of Gay Tony and Lost and the Damned were the saving grace for that game, the main story lacked the real GTA feel.
I still to this day play the other 3. Played throught the GTA 4 story once and never even considered playing it again.
A new GTA that has hopefully learned the lessons of Red Dead Redemption? That could be perfection.
My guess is it takes place in DC. (Hopefully not the Mexican/Drug scene in the southwest, I mean, Breaking Bad-type Gta would be somewhat cool driving around in a puke green Pontiac Aztek.) But I want to see Donald Love back. I always wondered what happened to him after his disappearance.
I just hope they incorporate the characterization & graphics from GTA 4; and add the content that San Andreas presented.
That would be an ideal game for me. Vice City and SA are my favorite GTA games because of its content, setting, story, characterization & humour. Not to mention an absolutely epic soundtrack.
GTA lacked content, other then that; I'd say it was a master-piece. But for a sandbox game to be perfect, content must be essential. Which is why I question anyone giving GTA 4 a perfect score. It was far from it, it was no where near as fun as San Andreas and to a lesser extent, Vice City.
One of the biggest Rockstar fans here, and will be anxiously awaiting the arrival of GTA 5.
By the way, I think RDR was superior to GTA 4, despite being less critically acclaimed.
hopefully you will be able to do a lot more in this game....cant believe that 4 took a step backwards in that aspect even though they had 4 in between games...and seriously is it that hard to just take the driving mechanics from Midnight club and put it in your game?
I cant think of many things San Andreas had over GTA 4. Think about the beefs and complaints for a second. If I miss any, feel free to add.
Bigger map, customize car, fight gangs for territory, parachute, soundtrack.
What else? Seems a bit silly that these options which are minor to say the least have some people thinking GTA 4 didnt top San Andreas.
GTA 4 killed San Andreas to me. And San Andreas was really what made me get into my ps2. I had one and rarely even played it but decided to check this game out. It was great...fot its time. But just like RDR topped GTA 4? So did GTA 4 with San Andreas. And really you want that to be the case. Learn from your former game.
I never put as much time into GTA 4 than I have any video game I ever had. Not counting the growing up to teenage days of course. Thats just story mode + 2 DLC which was pretty good (Ballad of Gay Tony easily the best). We wont even get into multiplayer. I bet there are people right now playing in Free Mode. Numerous lobbies. I bet there are people trying to level up playing Hangmans Noose. Does this argument mean its a case closed GTa 4 was classic because you can find gamers still on it today? No, but it makes you ask yourself what is it about GTA 4 that has people still playing it. It dropped in Spring 2008. Its 2011, with 2 months to hit 2012. Are you kidding me?
Maybe the criticism is that its not the perfect game and the nitpicking is showing that. I'll buy that. But I just dont see how this game lacks being a classic. I dont see how its not near great. I guess people were really caught up inthe gang bangin, yo homeboy break yo self fool stuff San Andreas brought. Its like I listen to gangsta music, I see it on tv but now I get to be apart of it to a degree. I know I'm offbase but it just feels like for some people that really is the case.