Grand Theft Auto Grieving Thread - Yep, I've been drinkin' again...

[Vault Boy]

Playing The Lost and the Damned and seeing what they did with the Johnny Klebitz character in GTA5 really bothers me now. It doesn't really jive with how TLATD ends and how he ends up in GTA5. Things can change of course and addiction does horrible things but he really has a quick stupid death.

Yeah, I was never a fan of how nearly the entire cast of TLAD got killed off in Trevor's first mission.

They didn't even have the decency to spread the deaths out, which makes me wonder if Dan Houser had it out for TLAD.

 

[The Last Stand]

Not directly related to GTA, but Rockstar has recently announced that Red Dead Redemption 2 will not receive any SP DLC.

Putting aside how utterly pissed I am that RDR2 will go through what GTA V did, that seems to be evidence that future GTA single player campaigns will more or less play second fiddle to Online. To call that a bitter realization is an understatement, to say the least.

Only a matter of time before R* just goes online only with their franchises. I would like to give them credit for telling us ahead of time unlike GTA V, but considering they were founded on single player experiences, this is really a slap in the face.

It makes me worried for Bully 2, and to a lesser extent, the next GTA.

Out of curiosity, who invented microtransactions? I want to know who to blame for this mess.

Apparently, R* started the Season Pass trend with their Max Payne 3 and L.A. Noire games. Take that what you will. Mobile games started this microtransactions craze, but Obsidian with Horse Armor was the forefather of AAA "microtransaction".

 

[Cod of War]

Only a matter of time before R* just goes online only with their franchises. I would like to give them credit for telling us ahead of time unlike GTA V, but considering they were founded on single player experiences, this is really a slap in the face.

It makes me worried for Bully 2, and to a lesser extent, the next GTA.


Apparently, R* started the Season Pass trend with their Max Payne 3 and L.A. Noire games. Take that what you will. Mobile games started this microtransactions craze, but Obsidian with Horse Armor was the forefather of AAA "microtransaction".

That was Bethesda with the Horse Armor. Don't want you to ree'd at for insulting the great Obsidian. /sneed

 

[vertexwindi]

Yeah, Obsidian only deserves rees for not knowing time management. And also TOW looking like shit.

 

[Vault Boy]

That was Bethesda with the Horse Armor. Don't want you to ree'd at for insulting the great Obsidian. /sneed

To be fair, he might've just misspelled the name of the game. Besides, Obsidian's schtick is releasing broken games through a combination of horrible management and inefficient use of their development time, not being the guys that inadvertently created the concept of microtransactions.

Anyway, I can't help but fear the thought of Online getting even more attention over future GTA campaigns. Bad enough that Rockstar refuses to support their campaigns post-launch these days, but what if they decided to devote even more resources to Online at the campaign's expense? How much worse could it possibly get?

 

[Mr. 0]

Anyway, I can't help but fear the thought of Online getting even more attention over future GTA campaigns. Bad enough that Rockstar refuses to support their campaigns post-launch these days, but what if they decided to devote even more resources to Online at the campaign's expense? How much worse could it possibly get?

No single-player campaign period a la Fallout 76. And they charge fees to start missions, and guns and cars are bought with real world currency.

 

[Randy Lahey]

No single-player campaign period a la Fallout 76. And they charge fees to start missions, and guns and cars are bought with real world currency.

And if you die, rockstar sends someone to your house to kick you in the nuts.

 

[Honka Honka Burning Love]

No single-player campaign period a la Fallout 76. And they charge fees to start missions, and guns and cars are bought with real world currency.

Given the fandom of GTA games, would a GTA game with zero single player campaign and only the online component be really all that poorly received by the core audience? The rest of that stuff would be aids, but how many people who play GTA play it for the Story?

 

[Mr. 0]

And if you die, rockstar sends someone to your house to kick you in the nuts.

No a Take Two agent will break your door down and take all your electronics to check for pirated content

but how many people who play GTA play it for the Story?

...I like how crazy the presentation gets sometimes.

 

[Black Waltz]

Given the fandom of GTA games, would a GTA game with zero single player campaign and only the online component be really all that poorly received by the core audience? The rest of that stuff would be aids, but how many people who play GTA play it for the Story?

I would hate it

 

[Honka Honka Burning Love]

I would hate it

You would sure, but are you the target GTA audience?

...I like how crazy the presentation gets sometimes.

So do I, that is why I hate 4 so much it is so. Bland.

 

[Vault Boy]

Given the fandom of GTA games, would a GTA game with zero single player campaign and only the online component be really all that poorly received by the core audience? The rest of that stuff would be aids, but how many people who play GTA play it for the Story?

Given how much the old games and V pre-Online sold, I'm not sure if forgoing a campaign would be smart of Rockstar. Even if the majority of players buy the games just to fuck around, having it be online only would be quite restrictive, especially if future iterations of Online punish players as much it does now.

No, campaigns are here to stay, even if Rockstar doesn't feel assed enough to pay attention to them after launch.

 

[Dom Cruise]

Yeah, I was never a fan of how nearly the entire cast of TLAD got killed off in Trevor's first mission.

They didn't even have the decency to spread the deaths out, which makes me wonder if Dan Houser had it out for TLAD.

It could have something to do with the fact that 4's DLC (or at least TLAD ) started off as 360 exclusives, which maybe wasn't Dan's idea, so that could be why he had it out for TLAD.

Only a matter of time before R* just goes online only with their franchises. I would like to give them credit for telling us ahead of time unlike GTA V, but considering they were founded on single player experiences, this is really a slap in the face.

It makes me worried for Bully 2, and to a lesser extent, the next GTA.


Apparently, R* started the Season Pass trend with their Max Payne 3 and L.A. Noire games. Take that what you will. Mobile games started this microtransactions craze, but Obsidian with Horse Armor was the forefather of AAA "microtransaction".

Call me optimistic, but I don't see Rockstar abandoning single player, at least so long as the Housers are part of them.


Speaking of Rockstar though, does anyone else think they should reboot The Warriors as an open world game? 1970s era NYC would be the perfect setting for an open world game.

Getting drunk in seedy bars, going to porno theaters, it'd be great.

 

[Syaoran Li]

It could have something to do with the fact that 4's DLC (or at least TLAD ) started off as 360 exclusives, which maybe wasn't Dan's idea, so that could be why he had it out for TLAD.



Call me optimistic, but I don't see Rockstar abandoning single player, at least so long as the Housers are part of them.


Speaking of Rockstar though, does anyone else think they should reboot The Warriors as an open world game? 1970s era NYC would be the perfect setting for an open world game.

Getting drunk in seedy bars, going to porno theaters, it'd be great.

I kind of get the feeling that the reason why Johnny and The Lost MC got the shaft in GTA V probably had more to do with higher ups at Rockstar or Take-Two than with the Housers.

Dan Houser has actually spoken against some of the more dubious decisions that were made in GTA V, such as the lack of single-player updates or the micro-transactions in GTA Online. IIRC, he mentioned in an interview that he did not want to include the Shark Cards in GTA Online but was overruled by someone higher up at Rockstar/Take Two.

I'd love to see an open-world game set in NYC during the 70's. If anything, I think it would be an awesome idea if GTA VI is set in Liberty City during the 1970's, especially if they expanded the map to include The Carroways and the entire state of Alderney (or maybe have a rural region based on upstate New York) and they wouldn't have to worry about trying to re-license The Warriors either.

Dan Houser did give an interview a while back where he criticized Current Year woke culture for both stifling potential creativity and more importantly, being so over the top and ridiculous that it's near impossible to satirize.

During that interview, he did sort of imply that he wanted to make the next GTA game a period piece since it'd be more timeless and could focus on the setting and story more easily as opposed to trying to make satire out of an already very ridiculous world.

If you ever wonder why so many people on YouTube and GTA Forums are convinced that the next GTA game will be set in Vice City during the 80's again, this is why.

 

[Vault Boy]

It could have something to do with the fact that 4's DLC (or at least TLAD ) started off as 360 exclusives, which maybe wasn't Dan's idea, so that could be why he had it out for TLAD.

Not sure about that. The Ballad of Gay Tony was also a temporary 360 exclusive, and the only character that got shat on and killed off was that dickhead Rocco. While Luis was never mentioned, Tony was the focus of that nightclub DLC for Online, and he was apparently doing well with himself.

I still don't get why TLAD got singled out to get the shaft, especially with how beloved it is amongst the GTA fanbase.

 

[Dom Cruise]

I kind of get the feeling that the reason why Johnny and The Lost MC got the shaft in GTA V probably had more to do with higher ups at Rockstar or Take-Two than with the Housers.

Dan Houser has actually spoken against some of the more dubious decisions that were made in GTA V, such as the lack of single-player updates or the micro-transactions in GTA Online. IIRC, he mentioned in an interview that he did not want to include the Shark Cards in GTA Online but was overruled by someone higher up at Rockstar/Take Two.

I'd love to see an open-world game set in NYC during the 70's. If anything, I think it would be an awesome idea if GTA VI is set in Liberty City during the 1970's, especially if they expanded the map to include The Carroways and the entire state of Alderney (or maybe have a rural region based on upstate New York) and they wouldn't have to worry about trying to re-license The Warriors either.

Dan Houser did give an interview a while back where he criticized Current Year woke culture for both stifling potential creativity and more importantly, being so over the top and ridiculous that it's near impossible to satirize.

During that interview, he did sort of imply that he wanted to make the next GTA game a period piece since it'd be more timeless and could focus on the setting and story more easily as opposed to trying to make satire out of an already very ridiculous world.

If you ever wonder why so many people on YouTube and GTA Forums are convinced that the next GTA game will be set in Vice City during the 80's again, this is why.

Vice City during the 80's again is what I would like to see for GTA, there is a world of potential in that setting done with modern tech.

But Liberty City in the 1970s would be great as well.

 

[Syaoran Li]

Vice City during the 80's again is what I would like to see for GTA, there is a world of potential in that setting done with modern tech.

But Liberty City in the 1970s would be great as well.

I'd love to see Vice City again, but not if it's in the 80's. We had that twice back in the 3D Era.

I still think 1970's Liberty City would be the best bet, or we could see an HD Era game set in the 80's or 90's but in a different city than their 3D predecessors (like an 80's GTA not set in Vice City or a 90's GTA not set in Los Santos).

Hell, I'd even like to see R* do a GTA game in the 2000's as an explicit period piece. GTA III and IV may have been set in that decade, but they were also released back then too. There is a difference in building a setting that is current for the time and building a setting that's a period piece.

Since 2000 is just a little under twenty years ago now, why not do a nostalgic 2000's GTA?

 

[Spatula]

I don't remember exactly, but they mentioned after GTA4 that they won't make a game in Liberty City again.

I hope we get to see Las Venturas and San Fierro in a real big expanded map.

 

[Syaoran Li]

I don't remember exactly, but they mentioned after GTA4 that they won't make a game in Liberty City again.

I hope we get to see Las Venturas and San Fierro in a real big expanded map.

IIRC, I don't think it was the Housers who said that though. I think it was Leslie Benzies or one of the other Rockstar big wigs no longer involved with the company.

I doubt we'll see a GTA game in Liberty City that's meant to be a current setting like III and IV were though. But I would not rule out a period piece in Liberty City, especially if it's in the 1970's or early 1980's.

 

[The Last Stand]

I don't remember exactly, but they mentioned after GTA4 that they won't make a game in Liberty City again.

I believe you're talking about this from the Episodes of Liberty City manual.

I would hope they're done with Liberty City. It was done to death at least four times.

However, the cut Carraways concept would prove to be a big leap for the next generation. Vice City in the HD era would be nice.

I hope we get to see Las Venturas and San Fierro in a real big expanded map.

Had R* stuck with their original plans for story DLC for V, or hell, even waited for the next gen systems to take advantage, that would've had so much potential.