Support NeoGAF

[grkazan12]

I doubt Rockstar North would support it, but my dream for the PC port of GTA V is steam works with workshop support. Installing mods for IV was already easy enough, but imagine being able to choose and install from a plethora of mods with a single click of a button.

They could support Steam works after seeing them use it for Max Payne 3. Mod support through Steam would be crazy though.

 

[Raptomex]

Sigh, I can't say I would be surprised if there was giant gap between the PC and consoles releases.

There usually is, unfortunately. Maybe we'll get lucky this time around. Either way I'm getting it for all consoles and PC. I plan to upgrade my PC for it anyway.

 

[UrbanRats]

Yup it's been a problem since then. Give me a GTA Vice City scale city, with more to do inside it and more interaction, than just expanding the scale and having these big useless set pieces.

Man it's like 20 streets at best, it's fucking tiny.

 

[Muffdraul]

Im in the same boat. I really wanted to like the 90's West Coast aesthetic of San Andres, but the game just had to much stuff to do and just felt too big.

Always nice to find out I wasn't the only one who felt this way. I loved San Andreas the first time I played it, but it did start to wear out its welcome before I finished it. Damn thing just kept going, and going, and going... Since then it's the only GTA that I've never been able to replay fully. I've tried a few times, I always get about halfway through the San Fiero missions and just can't go on. By the time I feel like playing it again so much time has passed that I want to start over. Bigger isn't always better. Sometimes bigger is just bloated. Meanwhile I've replayed GTA III, VC and IV god only knows how many times. I have a feeling GTA V is going to try my patience again, but I know it'll be good for at least one play-thru.

 

[Raptomex]

Always nice to find out I wasn't the only one who felt this way. I loved San Andreas the first time I played it, but it did start to wear out its welcome before I finished it. Damn thing just kept going, and going, and going... Since then it's the only GTA that I've never been able to replay fully. I've tried a few times, I always get about halfway through the San Fiero missions and just can't go on. By the time I feel like playing it again so much time has past that I want to start over. Bigger isn't always better. Sometimes bigger is just bloated. Meanwhile I've replayed GTA III, VC and IV god only knows how many times. I have a feeling GTA V is going to try my patience again, but I know it'll be good for at least one play-thru.

From what I understand GTA V might be the biggest GTA game to date environmentally. I don't have a problem with it if it's detailed enough. I loved San Andreas. I've completed that game so many times I've lost count.

 

[Dark_AnNiaLatOr]

I hope it's bigger than San Andreas and has the great cheats that it had, including nitro on cars in order to get through the giant landscape quickly.

 

[Buckethead]

Man it's like 20 streets at best, it's fucking tiny.

Not Vice City small but I agree with him.

I'd really like small, intimately detailed GTA.

Two cities, countryside inbetween.

 

[UrbanRats]

Not Vice City small but I agree with him.

I'd really like small, intimately detailed GTA.

Two cities, countryside inbetween.

Their maps are always extremely detailed anyway, i personally want something huge, so that i can feel lost in it, i love that feeling.

 

[Fjordson]

Always nice to find out I wasn't the only one who felt this way. I loved San Andreas the first time I played it, but it did start to wear out its welcome before I finished it. Damn thing just kept going, and going, and going... Since then it's the only GTA that I've never been able to replay fully. I've tried a few times, I always get about halfway through the San Fiero missions and just can't go on. By the time I feel like playing it again so much time has passed that I want to start over. Bigger isn't always better. Sometimes bigger is just bloated. Meanwhile I've replayed GTA III, VC and IV god only knows how many times. I have a feeling GTA V is going to try my patience again, but I know it'll be good for at least one play-thru.

I'm the same way. San Andreas is definitely my least favourite 3D GTA.

That being said, it's still a personal classic, so if V is like SA in some ways I'll still love it.

 

[TheNatural]

There's no reason why we can't have bigger scale and more stuff to do. That's why San Andreas nailed it in my opinion, because it was vast but it was so fun to explore and there was so much stuff to do. RDR has been the only game to come close to the sense of immersion that SA offered... just driving through the countryside in the rain or flying through the desert in a jet felt magical.

I think that's what most people missed from GTAIV and, if anything, IV is the perfect example of Rockstar trying to create a super dense and detailed environment and failing to fill it with exciting things to do.

What was fun about a barren countryside of doing nothing? What was fun about swimming training with some Superman 64 rings shit? Gang war babysitting the flashing grid all the time? Oops ate too much hamburger, go to the gym to fill up my strength meter. And so on. I liked how Vice City hit the right mark between the two. Bigger doesn't make better. I don't want to stare at the fucking map GPS the whole game to find out where to go like GTA IV.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Please bring back rpg like elements from SA. PLEASE!

 

[bengraven]

Vice City is still a very nice size.

There's no need pounding around with a big one. If you're bored with a big fat map, I'd rather mess with a tiny one to get to the climax.

 

[Buckethead]

One thing that is great about San Andreas is the flow of the map.

Most everything blends into the next making driving really nice and fun.

In IV it's a goddamn chore. And I'm not even talking vehicle physics.

Hope they paid attention to that here.

 

[tuna on toast]

I wasn't sure if the size comparisons of the GTA maps on the internet were accurate, so I decided to make my own. I used the in-game stats to measure a half mile distance.

http://i.imgur.com/qdcZA.jpg

My estimated size of Los Santos in GTA V is about the same size as the Los Santos in San Andreas.

 

[InaudibleWhispa]

What was fun about a barren countryside of doing nothing?

It was fun to explore. It created a sense of scale and an atmosphere that was unrivalled at the time. The same reason I love just riding my horse around RDR. It just feels good. Couple that with the insane array of weapons and vehicles and you have an amazing playground to make your own fun. It's fine if all of that just bored you to death, but I think most people loved it.

 

[UrbanRats]

What was fun about a barren countryside of doing nothing? What was fun about swimming training with some Superman 64 rings shit? Gang war babysitting the flashing grid all the time? Oops ate too much hamburger, go to the gym to fill up my strength meter. And so on. I liked how Vice City hit the right mark between the two. Bigger doesn't make better. I don't want to stare at the fucking map GPS the whole game to find out where to go like GTA IV.

You can say that about any activity in any GTA, really, included the missions themselves.

It was fun to explore. It created a sense of scale and an atmosphere that was unrivalled at the time. The same reason I love just riding my horse around RDR. It just feels good. Couple that with the insane array of weapons and vehicles and you have an amazing playground to make your own fun. It's fine if all of that just bored you to death, but I think most people loved it.

Exactly, SA was so packed with stuff, as soon as you were bored of one thing you could go to the next, and the map wasn't really that barren at all, we're not talking about FUEL or even Just Cause 2 here.

 

[biggersmaller]

I want a big friggin map. Damn the haters.

I also want the insane L.A. traffic and pedestrian density in the city center. That's what makes it feel like a "real" city. After getting that on GTAIV (PC) I can't go back to the sparseness of the console versions.

 

[Muffdraul]

I want a big friggin map. Damn the haters.

I also want the insane L.A. traffic and pedestrian density in the city center. That's what makes it feel like a "real" city. After getting that on GTAIV (PC) I can't go back to the sparseness of the console versions.

It wasn't just the size of the map, it was the seemingly endless drives through rural areas that happened too many times between leaving Los Santos and getting access to planes. That's what did me in, anyway.

I'm down with a humongous map if they keep the super long boring ass drives to a minimum. Oddly enough this sort of thing didn't bother me in RDR... it just felt "right" in that context I guess.

 

[tuna on toast]

I'd enjoy going out into the forest/desert at night and looking at the city from a distance and listening to the wildlife.

Also, I'd really like a road like this -

 

[biggersmaller]

It wasn't just the size of the map, it was the seemingly endless drives through rural areas that happened too many times between leaving Los Santos and getting access to planes. That's what did me in, anyway.

I'm down with a humongous map if they keep the super long boring ass drives to a minimum.

I was thinking it would be fun when driving to have a busy metro fade into long stretches of shitty bars, gas stations, and farms. I think a R* send-up of rest stops could be hilarious.

 

[Chip N Chance]

I'd enjoy going out into the forest/desert at night and looking at the city from a distance and listening to the wildlife.

Also, I'd really like a road like this -

Fixed

 

[Fjordson]

I'd enjoy going out into the forest/desert at night and looking at the city from a distance and listening to the wildlife.

Also, I'd really like a road like this -

This would be pretty awesome.

 

[Dark_AnNiaLatOr]

With a road like that. They'd have to make forest gump playable.

 

[UrbanRats]

With a road like that. They'd have to make forest gump playable.

Was it in Vice City, were the more you ran, the longer the sprint lasted?

 

[Jac_Solar]

How can anyone complain about a game cause it's so big, and because you have "only" been able to play halfway through it again? That's almost like complaining about a game cause it's so huge, you don't have time to finish it in one or 2 sittings, which many people also do.

The idea behind a very small but interesting and detailed enviroment may be sound, but it's much harder to convey a sense of scale and adventure with that concept.

I think a game like Sleeping Dogs (Which is probably the best example of a small, but detailed GTA-like open world at the moment.), for example, forgot to consider that games are in a unique position to offer a sense of exploration, adventure, and a journey with the world.

San Andreas, which is the opposite of Sleeping Dogs in this respect, was far more fun to explore - it's in a different league alltogether. Games with small worlds also tend to have very few types of enviroments (1-2.), cause it would probably look a bit weird.

 

[UrbanRats]

Yeah as much as i loved Sleeping Dogs, the city felt really small.
Not that Hong Kong is massive, but still..

 

[Fjordson]

Speaking of Sleeping Dogs, you guys hear about that DLC they have coming out? Horror DLC in an open-world game, could be an interesting combination.

Spoiler

sorry, I know that was bad :lol couldn't help it

 

[electroshockwave]

Was it in Vice City, were the more you ran, the longer the sprint lasted?

San Andreas.

 

[GlamFM]

I wasn't sure if the size comparisons of the GTA maps on the internet were accurate, so I decided to make my own. I used the in-game stats to measure a half mile distance.

http://i.imgur.com/qdcZA.jpg

My estimated size of Los Santos in GTA V is about the same size as the Los Santos in San Andreas.

No way your comparison is correct. VC is too big or IV is too small.

 

[bomma_man]

I've never finished a GTA campaign because they drag on and on and on and on and I completely lose interest. DMA desperately need an editor, so much fucking filler.

edit: and I'm a fan of Skyward Sword!

 

[Fjordson]

I've never finished a GTA campaign

Oh my, you've missed out on some good shit.

 

[Raitosaito]

Oh my, you've missed out on some good shit.

And also some really repetitive missions.

 

[Tankshell]

I generally only play gta games until the point where most vehicles and map is unlocked, then just mess about in the sandbox.

 

[Fjordson]

And also some really repetitive missions.

That baggage comes with pretty much any open-world game that I've played. I'm just talking about GTA specifically, which have had some killer missions towards the end.

Though they topped the entire series with the Red Dead ending. Damn.

 

[Muffdraul]

How can anyone complain about a game cause it's so big, and because you have "only" been able to play halfway through it again? That's almost like complaining about a game cause it's so huge, you don't have time to finish it in one or 2 sittings, which many people also do.

It's because I'm a compulsive game replayer. If I like a game, I replay it. I want to experience it again. I enjoy experiencing it again. Sometimes I honestly enjoy replaying more than the first play. The fact that I can't replay SA says a lot. And as I said, SA started to wear on my nerves *before* I finished it the first time. That says a lot too.

I'm not saying you or anyone else has to agree with me or give a shit what I think.

 

[Evolution_1ne]

what is this, people didn't like san andreas because it was.......too big

 

[Muffdraul]

what is this, people didn't like san andreas because it was.......too big

WHAT YOU SAY

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

I've replayed SA multiple times. The atmosphere is damn amazing on every map.

 

[flyinpiranha]

What was fun about a barren countryside of doing nothing? What was fun about swimming training with some Superman 64 rings shit? Gang war babysitting the flashing grid all the time? Oops ate too much hamburger, go to the gym to fill up my strength meter. And so on. I liked how Vice City hit the right mark between the two. Bigger doesn't make better. I don't want to stare at the fucking map GPS the whole game to find out where to go like GTA IV.

Why didn't you do things on the countryside? Sounds like you don't like exploring and just using vehicles and weapons to create havoc.

You could say all this same shit about any fucking game if you only point out the repetitive stuff you didn't enjoy.

And you're wrong, with GTA in comparison to VC and SA, bigger WAS better, bigger IS better because you are in the vast minority of people who don't enjoy wide open games with shitloads of choices of things to do.

I liked having to look at my map in GTA IV because it made me have the feeling of not memorizing the city like in VC. Where is the fun if you know every nook and cranny? I just can't fathom wanting that from a GTA. I love turning a corner and not knowing where I was. IV was amazing in that aspect but they forgot to pack it with crazy shit you could do.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

The countryside may have been barren, but wreaking havoc and having 5 stars was fun as hell.

So was flying. I'd just fly the jet San Ferrio, jump, out, parachute, and cause more mayhem.

And flying over the ocean during sunrise was......peaceful.

 

[Deleted member 80556]

what is this, people didn't like san andreas because it was.......too big

And don't forget that having too many things to do is also bad!

Seriously, that's what made SA so awesome.

 

[Guri]

I like Vice City more not because of the map, but more about the way the game didn't take itself too seriously. SA did that too, but I didn't like the setting (characters, motives, etc). Not to say the the 80s satire of VC was the best thing, but the missions were more appealing for me. And I know it's rare to play GTA for its story, but that's what keeps me focused on open-world games. I like exploration, but I also like to be encouraged to see the missions.

 

[TheNatural]

Why didn't you do things on the countryside? Sounds like you don't like exploring and just using vehicles and weapons to create havoc.

You could say all this same shit about any fucking game if you only point out the repetitive stuff you didn't enjoy.

And you're wrong, with GTA in comparison to VC and SA, bigger WAS better, bigger IS better because you are in the vast minority of people who don't enjoy wide open games with shitloads of choices of things to do.

I liked having to look at my map in GTA IV because it made me have the feeling of not memorizing the city like in VC. Where is the fun if you know every nook and cranny? I just can't fathom wanting that from a GTA. I love turning a corner and not knowing where I was. IV was amazing in that aspect but they forgot to pack it with crazy shit you could do.

Vice city had better missions, San Andreas replaced them with busy work and babysitting. That's my main point. Adding shit for the sake of adding shit doesn't make the game better.

And hey, you liked looking at a map and GPS to find where to do, great. You could save yourself some money and type in random addresses on Google Maps if that's your sort of entertainment. Personally, I hope that GTA V is a hell of a lot more navigable and not a stale concrete environment like 4 was.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

I'd enjoy going out into the forest/desert at night and looking at the city from a distance and listening to the wildlife.

Also, I'd really like a road like this -

I've wanted a road like this since the first time I reached the desert areas of San Andreas back in 2004. Wanting Rockstar to scale down back to Vice City size is insane. I don't agree with that at all. The sense of space that San Andreas provided in the genre was unmatched back then, and I want to see that again. More countryside, longer highway loops, more desert, more space. I WANT to crash a plane in the desert at night and have to trek back to civilization fighting off animals until I reach some backwoods house and steal the ATV parked next to the mass grave cause the guy who lives out there is insane. It builds character.

 

[unknownhero]

I really hope that this game can be to me what vice city was to gta 3 if you know what I mean. The original san andreas would have been my #1 if it wasn't for that weak willed protagonist and the fact that, in my honest opinion, there was to much dead space.

 

[tuna on toast]

No way your comparison is correct. VC is too big or IV is too small.

Why do you think that? I double-checked the measurements. Go see for yourself if you have the games.

 

[Buckethead]

I really hope that this game can be to me what vice city was to gta 3 if you know what I mean. The original san andreas would have been my #1 if it wasn't for that weak willed protagonist and the fact that, in my honest opinion, there was to much dead space.

So you prefer an amoral sociopath? Gotcha.

(I love Ray Liotta).

 

[UrbanRats]

So you prefer an amoral sociopath? Gotcha.

(I love Ray Liotta).

I do.
In the context of GTA anyway, can't stand the recluctant criminal they've been trying to push since SA.
Though CJ was alright.

BTW, R* asking feedback for the GTAV multiplayer/crews:
http://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/article/45621/what-would-you-like-to-see-in-gtav-crews.html

 

[deejay8595]

https://twitter.com/GI_AndyMc/status/260832514707447809

And since people are asking, we should have the release date of the magazine available to you at the end of the week (worse case, Monday)

 

[ThanksVision]

An announcement of an announcement of an announcement. Okay.