GTA VI

[Cicero]

Hearing map is twice the size as V. 

They did those PS4 and Xbox One noobs a solid by giving them a year to buy next Gen. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

5 hours ago, nudge said:

Or Hongkong. Oh wait, we already have that in Sleeping Dogs.

That game was great!

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 hours ago, Danny said:

I for one am really glad that they released a trailer for a game that they won’t release for another two years. It really makes their lack of development over the last decade something to be excited by.

The game was at its peak when it was almost year by year, idea by idea, who knows what you get next.

The last two games have been difficult to really get into and they made the game so vast that it lost the character of previous versions like San Andreas and Vice City.

Tbf to Rockstar, they tend to make games where the scale is always massive compared to the other games around at the time, with a fully fleshed out story (and side stories), that are typically very polished and bug free at launch. GTA IV, V, and RDR2 were all impeccable games at launch. Great stories, great games, with tremendous scale to them. They make GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas seem tiny by comparison - and at the time, there were no games that compared to the scale of those.

I'll always prefer games like that, regardless of how long it takes to develop them and release them with the amount of polish we come to expect from Rockstar. Starfield's a game that was in development for over 12 years - and Bethesda was bold with the scale and what you can do in the game... and it's a game I enjoy, yet at the same time ended up feeling a little disappointed that this was the end result after all those years in development from the same studio that brought us Fallout 3, Fallout 4, and the Elders Scrolls series. Honestly, I don't think it was ready for release - it seems like some stuff was hastily cut. I imagine Microsoft pushed for its release because for them it's a very slow year for good exclusive games. Not to say that it's a bad game, it's not a bad game, but it's not really what was promised... and it ends up feeling very rough around the edges at times.

Similarly, Cyberpunk 2077 was a game with grand scale and big promises, and at launch was a horrific buggy mess because it was rushed out.

You only get one chance to make a first impression. Rockstar typically makes really great first impressions - and if it takes time for them to do that... I am all for giving them all the time they need. We don't want a half-baked adventure in Vice City, we want something really polished that's a great game right from the off.

If it ends up close to being as good as RDR2 or GTA5 it's going to be a fantastic game. It also gives me time to finish up the last few missions of GTA 5!

[Bluebird Hewitt]

3 hours ago, Cicero said:

Hearing map is twice the size as V. 

They did those PS4 and Xbox One noobs a solid by giving them a year to buy next Gen. 

Sounds great, but I hope there are a lot of things to do within the map if true, otherwise it's a huge map with a lot of emptiness.

[Danny]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Tbf to Rockstar, they tend to make games where the scale is always massive compared to the other games around at the time, with a fully fleshed out story (and side stories), that are typically very polished and bug free at launch. GTA IV, V, and RDR2 were all impeccable games at launch. Great stories, great games, with tremendous scale to them. They make GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas seem tiny by comparison - and at the time, there were no games that compared to the scale of those.

I'll always prefer games like that, regardless of how long it takes to develop them and release them with the amount of polish we come to expect from Rockstar. Starfield's a game that was in development for over 12 years - and Bethesda was bold with the scale and what you can do in the game... and it's a game I enjoy, yet at the same time ended up feeling a little disappointed that this was the end result after all those years in development from the same studio that brought us Fallout 3, Fallout 4, and the Elders Scrolls series. Honestly, I don't think it was ready for release - it seems like some stuff was hastily cut. I imagine Microsoft pushed for its release because for them it's a very slow year for good exclusive games. Not to say that it's a bad game, it's not a bad game, but it's not really what was promised... and it ends up feeling very rough around the edges at times.

Similarly, Cyberpunk 2077 was a game with grand scale and big promises, and at launch was a horrific buggy mess because it was rushed out.

You only get one chance to make a first impression. Rockstar typically makes really great first impressions - and if it takes time for them to do that... I am all for giving them all the time they need. We don't want a half-baked adventure in Vice City, we want something really polished that's a great game right from the off.

If it ends up close to being as good as RDR2 or GTA5 it's going to be a fantastic game. It also gives me time to finish up the last few missions of GTA 5!

I just think the last two games have lacked the character and that previous titles have had and the need for everything to be gigantic is almost a turn off for me as the game then becomes about trying to fill up a world with characters for the sake of it. The best two games were for me without a doubt San Andreas and Vice City, both came out relatively quickly and both created a sense of nostalgia and great storylines before you fully got into them.

I’m sure the graphics will be great and I’m sure they’ll create a massive world to play in but for me the storylines have been a bit dull in comparison to them since.

Which is annoying because Red Dead Redemption was phenomenal and well above the two GTA’s they’ve released.

[Dr. Gonzo]

31 minutes ago, Danny said:

I just think the last two games have lacked the character and that previous titles have had and the need for everything to be gigantic is almost a turn off for me as the game then becomes about trying to fill up a world with characters for the sake of it. The best two games were for me without a doubt San Andreas and Vice City, both came out relatively quickly and both created a sense of nostalgia and great storylines before you fully got into them.

I’m sure the graphics will be great and I’m sure they’ll create a massive world to play in but for me the storylines have been a bit dull in comparison to them since.

Which is annoying because Red Dead Redemption was phenomenal and well above the two GTA’s they’ve released.

I thought 4 and 5 had loads of character tbh. The most annoying thing about both games, from my perspective, was in 4 needing to take your cousin bowling or going out on dates with that FBI woman.

I'm not surprised the RDR games have better stories though - those games, imo, are just top tier. I doubt I'll ever play a game as good as the first Red Dead Redemption ever again, that game was so good it should have won "Best Picture" at the Oscars despite not being a film.

[Bluebird Hewitt]

Randomly thinking (and if it suited the game's tone), one thing I liked about GTA Chinatown Wars was that your main source of income (as well as missions) was via drug dealing, whereby you bought certain drugs cheap in places and sold them on for more in other areas, with drug busts happening by the police randomly and you had escape from them.

I think if that was developed a bit further, that could become a decent mechanic for money making.

[JoshBRFC+]

12 hours ago, Bluebird Hewitt said:

Sounds great, but I hope there are a lot of things to do within the map if true, otherwise it's a huge map with a lot of emptiness.

70% of buildings will be accessible. 
 

2 years ffs. 

[DeadLinesman]

1 hour ago, JoshBRFC said:

70% of buildings will be accessible. 
 

2 years ffs. 

It’s never going to be 70%. I think that’s one of the more stupid rumours I heard. 

[Bluebird Hewitt]

1 hour ago, JoshBRFC said:

70% of buildings will be accessible. 
 

2 years ffs. 

We've waited 10 years for GTA6 so far, so another 2 years won't hurt. It'll fly by anyway.

Alternatively, you can always freeze yourself like Cartman did. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Bluebird Hewitt

[Danny]

13 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I thought 4 and 5 had loads of character tbh. The most annoying thing about both games, from my perspective, was in 4 needing to take your cousin bowling or going out on dates with that FBI woman.

I'm not surprised the RDR games have better stories though - those games, imo, are just top tier. I doubt I'll ever play a game as good as the first Red Dead Redemption ever again, that game was so good it should have won "Best Picture" at the Oscars despite not being a film.

If you like the game thats fair enough, I know a lot of people do. I just feel like with the increasing map sizes they create multiple characters and stories that feel like theyre there to fill the game up rather than provide something that is as ground breaking as their earlier efforts, or like you say Red Dead.

[Beelzebub]

making 70% buildings accessible would add nothing significant to game experience anyway

[Mel81x+]

On 07/12/2023 at 11:03, Beelzebub said:

making 70% buildings accessible would add nothing significant to game experience anyway

This

[Mel81x+]

On 06/12/2023 at 02:01, Dr. Gonzo said:

I'm not surprised the RDR games have better stories though - those games, imo, are just top tier. I doubt I'll ever play a game as good as the first Red Dead Redemption ever again, that game was so good it should have won "Best Picture" at the Oscars despite not being a film.

This was platinum tier gaming at its finest. I doubt they'll ever top that with the series ever again. It was fresh, had excellent gameplay value and to top it off it had a story that made you want to play it even more.