NovaXpress #1 Posted January 9, 2004 http://www.computerandvideogames.com/r/?pa...y.php?id=100101 Looks like this is the next title, since Rockstar just registered the domains. The next one will still use the GTA3 engine. Now I realize we should have seen this coming, what were the 3 cities in the first GTA? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brad2600 #2 Posted January 9, 2004 Original cities in the first GTA? Liberty City, Vice City and San Andreas. I personally love these games for giving me a way to take out my anger without putting anyone in the hospital. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NovaXpress #3 Posted January 9, 2004 Since it's set in San Francisco, that means lots of hills to launch off, hopefully an earthquake or two. So if these rumors are correct, we get three GTAs for the PS2, each a 3D recreation of one of the original cities. Meanwhile they are working on a GTA to help launch the PS3. That would have to take place in London. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gregory DG #4 Posted January 9, 2004 IGN reported that the next GTA would be called Sin City and be in Las Vegas... Hmmm... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NovaXpress #5 Posted January 9, 2004 Amazon also put up GTA:Sin City for advance sale for a day, then took it down when Rockstar announced that was a hoax. San Andreas makes sense, and the domains have been registered. Slashdot bit on this as well: http://games.slashdot.org/games/04/01/08/2...tid=186&tid=212 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+kisrael #6 Posted January 9, 2004 Wonder how big of a leap it will be, game wise? Probably not much if it's on the same generation... Does anyone know, is there much resemblance between Liberty City and Vice City in the GTA3 and GTA:VC vs what was shown in the original, like map wise? Or did they just borrow the name? I played VC before GTA3, so I was kind of amused by GTA3's overhead camera angle that made it look so much like GTA2... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brad2600 #7 Posted January 9, 2004 I think it will be just another expansion and hopefully they'll be able to tweak it a bit so that the series can go out with a bang on the PS2. As for PS3, I would probably not worry too much about it. Even if it has a new GTA game, it will probably not be worth the extra expense as the PS2 is still quite young. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+kisrael #8 Posted January 9, 2004 As for PS3, I would probably not worry too much about it. Even if it has a new GTA game, it will probably not be worth the extra expense as the PS2 is still quite young. PS2 ain't THAT young...and it's definately weaker than its competitors. I really wish they'd design the next GTA on one of the more powerful system, the constraints of the PS2 are why you get stupid stuff like cars disappearing when your back is turned...not enough RAM. Or so I've been told. A GTA designed from scratch for Xbox would likely be a lot more impressive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+kisrael #9 Posted January 9, 2004 Heh...and what I really hate these days is all the references to the upcoming GT:4, the racing game...I keep reading it and hoping they mean GTA:4 (or GTA:SA or whatever) Speaking of which, I just don't get the appeal of Gran Turismo. Especially how cars can't be damaged, the bane of almost any game that uses "real" brandname car models. And realistic racing is general...feh. Gimme a half decent physics engine and let me batter my car to tiny pieces ala Grand Theft Auto... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brad2600 #10 Posted January 9, 2004 I agree with you on GT4, kisrael. If the cars cannot be damaged, why bother? A GTA designed from scratch for the PS3 would probably be impressive as well ONLY if the PS3 is powerful enough to accomplish such a thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+kisrael #11 Posted January 9, 2004 I agree with you on GT4, kisrael. If the cars cannot be damaged, why bother? And I wonder how many people play this "hyper realistic" game with a mini stick based controller. Actually, one thing I've always wondered about...is it easier to play a realistic racer with a steering wheel controller? Because they do see damn difficult to me using a dual shock or whatever. A GTA designed from scratch for the PS3 would probably be impressive as well ONLY if the PS3 is powerful enough to accomplish such a thing. Well, I'm sure anything made for any nextgen machine will be really amazing. Sometimes I forget how high our visual standards have gotten til I go back to a N64 or PSX game... Already I've been fooled by a game I wasn't paying attention to...it was Madden or some other recent football game, some people had left it on in the background, it was waiting for a button press to confirm a penalty message...the camera angles kept switching around to players just standing around, looking pissed, shifting from foot to foot... the onscreen graphics looked straight from TV...without thinking about it I subconsciously assumed it was a tv program, 'til finally i realized the basic scene hadn't changed for like 10 minutes. And my (less discerning) older relatives look at say, the computer generated cut scene in Crimson Skies and ask if it's a game or a movie. They could probably figure it out, but still...the next generations of games are going to visually amazing. In some cases the only difference will be movies can have more interesting camera angles, because they don't have to make up a playable game... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cryptik76 #12 Posted January 10, 2004 So if these rumors are correct, we get three GTAs for the PS2, each a 3D recreation of one of the original cities. Meanwhile they are working on a GTA to help launch the PS3. That would have to take place in London. Ah, yes, I'm surprised people still remember the London 1969 expansion for the original GTA. And then after London would be a 3D representation of... um... what was the city in GTA 2 called? It's still on my hard drive, but I haven't played it in forever... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tantone56 #13 Posted January 10, 2004 It would have been cool if in vice city you cold walk up to the old arcade macheans and like play ms pacman or some othe cool game like that... That would have attracted vintage gamers to the gta series. as far as the san adreas thing goes I remember hearing about that like five months ago so I really dont know how valid it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Atariboy #14 Posted January 10, 2004 I thought GTA 3 was from a similar perspective as Vice City? Its a overhead view game like the Playstation GTA's? "Speaking of which, I just don't get the appeal of Gran Turismo. Especially how cars can't be damaged, the bane of almost any game that uses "real" brandname car models. And realistic racing is general...feh. Gimme a half decent physics engine and let me batter my car to tiny pieces ala Grand Theft Auto..." The GT series isn't realistic racing for starters. Any decent racing sim like NASCAR Racing 2003 Season or Grand Prix Legends has car damage. And I don't think GTA's physics engine exactly replicates realism from what I heard, its pure arcade. And also the point of a realistic racing sim isn't to damage your car. The point is to go 500 miles and win the race, or win the French Grand Prix or whatever. The point is to save your car and win the race, not turn around and go backwards and be awed by the awesome collision physics and see pieces of sheet metal flying into the grandstands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NovaXpress #15 Posted January 10, 2004 We don't need classic games inserted here, this game is more than good enough. As it turns out, "GTA3" is actually a series of 3 games: Liberty City in the original, Vice City, and the upcoming San Andreas. Each a 3D version of the 3 original cities. Rockstar also trademakeked GTA4, GTA5 and GTA6. After San Andreas the next GTA will be on PS3 but will that be GTA4 or GTA6 (counting CA and SA as $4 and 5)? Grand Turismo sucks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+kisrael #16 Posted January 10, 2004 It would have been cool if in vice city you cold walk up to the old arcade macheans and like play ms pacman or some othe cool game like that... That would have attracted vintage gamers to the gta series. as far as the san adreas thing goes I remember hearing about that like five months ago so I really dont know how valid it is. Vice City had some non-playable standup arcade games in the taxi company, Degenetron and Pogo the Monkey. Degenatron.com has "emulated" versions of the Degenatron games...mostly based on the description from the ingame "radio ads" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+kisrael #17 Posted January 10, 2004 I thought GTA 3 was from a similar perspective as Vice City? Its a overhead view game like the Playstation GTA's? GTA3 was generally played like Vice City view-wise, but Vice City dropped an optional camera angle selection that made GTA3 look amazingly like GTA2. (Amazing in the sense that GTA2 was more 3D than I ever realized...it just had a fixed camera angle) "Speaking of which, I just don't get the appeal of Gran Turismo. Especially how cars can't be damaged, the bane of almost any game that uses "real" brandname car models. And realistic racing is general...feh. Gimme a half decent physics engine and let me batter my car to tiny pieces ala Grand Theft Auto..."The GT series isn't realistic racing for starters. Any decent racing sim like NASCAR Racing 2003 Season or Grand Prix Legends has car damage. And I don't think GTA's physics engine exactly replicates realism from what I heard, its pure arcade. I don't think it's "pure" arcade....a magazine interview I read recently (EGM? or GMR) mentioned how its influence seems to have led to fewer arcadey racers. (ala the "Rush" series, I'd say) And also the point of a realistic racing sim isn't to damage your car. The point is to go 500 miles and win the race, or win the French Grand Prix or whatever. The point is to save your car and win the race, not turn around and go backwards and be awed by the awesome collision physics and see pieces of sheet metal flying into the grandstands. Oh yeah, saving my car sounds like fun... but seriously, if I want to race, I'll take a good kart racer any day over any even mostly realistic normal racer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+kisrael #18 Posted January 10, 2004 We don't need classic games inserted here, this game is more than good enough. Whats cool about the minigames that are included in GTA3+VC is that they don't feel like they're "leaving" the games core physics engine...I guess walking up to an arcade game would feel like too big of a shift. As it turns out, "GTA3" is actually a series of 3 games: Liberty City in the original, Vice City, and the upcoming San Andreas. Each a 3D version of the 3 original cities. So you say the maps are the same, that if you knew GTA map really well, you could get around Liberty City or Vice City in the PS2 game much more easily? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A2600 #19 Posted January 10, 2004 Ohh Man!! San Andreas!?! But thats cool I was expecting SIN City! On a flipside does anybody know if this is gonna be a PS2 only for a while then passed to the XBOX or a Dual release PS2/XBOX?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VidGameKing #20 Posted January 10, 2004 Since it's set in San Francisco, that means lots of hills to launch off, hopefully an earthquake or two. I should mention that the San Andreas fault runs from just North of Monterey up to far north of Eureka and is not a definet SanFrancisco mark. to asume that the game is in the SFBA is to say that a game called GTA: Central Valley is about Sacramento! there are many other cities in these locations. Maybe the game will take place in the small town of Eureka? or maybe Sasolito! And California is not riddled with Earth Quakes every ten seconds! I've lived in CA for all my life and I only remeber going through three of them. Most of which were so mild that you had to pay close attention to the way the ground felt to truely feel the quake. The only quake I remeber being violent was the loma preada quake. and that was a long time ago. Look!!!! the town of San Andreas isn't anywhere near San Francisco!!!! the closest major metropolitan area is Sacramento!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tantone56 #21 Posted January 10, 2004 maybe this one will take place in the 60's and you can help the zodiac killer and the manson family Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VidGameKing #22 Posted January 10, 2004 maybe this one will take place in the 60's and you can help the zodiac killer and the manson family still, what makes you think it will be in San Franciso?? and as for The Manson Family, they were SoCal, Beverly Hills to be exact. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
AtariAge on Instagram
Watch us on YouTube
Chat on Discord