[Felix]

[real_jamicus]

Looks like a real laugh-in for the bros, all right.

It could have good features, though, I mean know that. I'm probably going to buy this at some point.

[scratchmonkey]

I'd rather they both be sandboxy. GTA III is still my favorite of the series.

ETA: And it's not like I won't buy it and have a bunch of fun with it. It's just glaring that a game that is otherwise so much A Dream Game pulls the "you playin' awful" just because I want to try something that the designers didn't predict/don't want you to do.

[Mr. Mechanical]

Hey gang the guy that did the frame-by-frame analysis of the first trailer and done a second for the new one: http://www.lukeyy19.co.uk/trailer2breakdown/page1/

I'm really excited at switching between the three characters and I hope they can pull it off in a way that the mission design doesn't suffer for it. One of the things they talked about in the preview interviews is that they wanted to eliminate the downtime inherent with just a single playable character, e.g. those long drives from point A to B at the beginning of a mission. I'm imagining in those missions that feature at least two of the protagonists one of them will already be at the mission site regardless of who you start with so you can always just switch over and let the other guy drive himself to the mission, or something to this effect. I don't know but I think the mission design is still probably going to have a healthy reliance on sending the player on a road trip. It is a driving game, after all.

However just having three characters with overlapping narratives and being able to switch between them on the fly and even during the big heist missions where they're all working together sounds incredibly complex to plan for. While Dan Houser said they're trying to make it so that players can complete mission objectives in ways the designers hadn't planned for I think Scratchmonkey is probably correct in assuming that the increased complexity of having three characters will mean heavier scripting and less player freedom. We'll just have to see though.

Adding in RDR's dynamic, randomized events is a great and welcome idea but anyone that played that game knows that while it was a cool addition to the game it also was not nearly filled out enough. It did not take long to notice that there were only five kinds of these events (e.g. stop a hanging; stop and out-of-control stagecoach; guy's horse got stolen; etc.) and that any old ladies stranded on the road asking for help were going to ambush you the minute you stopped. If they want to make this a true feature to the game they're going to need to put a ton of content into it, that also happens to be very modular so it can all be randomly thrown together on the fly as you play. Picking up hitchhikers and seeing where it leads sounds cool but that can't be the only thing you do.

Regarding the characters themselves it's disappointing that there's not much diversity but then again it's a story written by a British guy who moved to New York. I do like that they all have such different backgrounds. Michael is the GTA protagonist that won. He's Tommy Vercetti at the end of Vice City, living plush. His friend Trevor is the psychotic GTA guy that everyone turns into the first time they play a GTA type game. And Franklin is the Other Guy, aka your typical GTA character, not rich yet but has ambitions.

I'm suspecting there are really two main stories being told here, at least initially. There's Michael and Trevor's story where they were friends once but had a falling out and now due to circumstance and the need for money find themselves working together again. Then there's Franklin whose story I'm betting is something of an homage to CJ from San Andreas but with the twist of being what Dan Houser describes as a "gang-banger in a post-gang-banging world". So Franklin will probably be our Fish Out of Water story in some sense, especially once his path crosses with Michael and Trevor's.

As an aside, it's also been reported from Rockstar that the whole game map is open from the start and from minute one you'll be able to swap between the three characters. I'm just leaving that here so we can all remember to come back in six or eight months to see if it was true.

As for the world itself there's wildlife in the country this time! As for Bigfoot I doubt we'll see him since he made an appearance in a mission in Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare where you had to kill several to clear the forests. Also there are dogs in the game which will also act as guard dogs so there will probably be a mission where you're trying to be stealthy but you get spotted by a dog or something.

All things considered I'm as excited as ever to play this even if it ends up being too ambitious. If they can deliver on even half of the potential represented in the proposed changes to the GTA formula then it'll be awesome. It'll probably be awesome anyway since it's a vast, beautiful place to explore and inhabit. Plus the multiplayer, whatever that ends up looking like.
_________________

[parker]

_________________

[Dark Age Iron Savior]

I hope this means Far Cry 3-style loot and crafting.



(holy crap)

[Swarm]

I want to explore an underwater cave in that thing

[Mr. Mechanical]

The game to end all games! Scuba gear! Submersibles! Seems like a good deal more attention is going into the swimming aspect than in San Andreas.

Here are the rest of the screens released today: http://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/article/47481/happy-holidays-enjoy.html

Also for all the rest of the screens released so far that haven't been posted in this thread: http://www.gtagaming.com/v/media/screenshots

I've been playing Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare recently and as I ride around taking in all the beautiful vistas in that game I think to myself that this is what part of GTA V is going to be like and I get all excited and stuff.
_________________

[Kid Chamillionaire]

in san andreas there weren't any threats underwater and now there are sharks and things and for the first time i will be terrified playing a sandbox game

[thestage]

[Oh God Spiders No]

whoooooooooa
_________________

[Mr. Mechanical]

[Dark Age Iron Savior]

as someone who won't play the game for probably a decade after release, I am really looking forward to seeing how Rockstar builds on the myths and flavor from San Andreas.
I could rattle off a dozen or two things that would work great in the setting (imagine joining in on groups of pedestrians that go hunting for UFOs in weird place), but what I really want is a mission where you have to get picked up at a gay bar by a Tom Cruise-alike in order to infiltrate an Epsilon Program compound to gain evidence for a divorce settlement hearing.

[Mr. Mechanical]

There was a mission in GTA 4 where Niko had to pretend to be gay to get a date on a dating site so he could get close to a guy that needed killing. It wasn't really that involved though, by which I mean the motivation and follow-through weren't as complex as the kind of thing you're describing. I agree though, it'd be neat to play a mission like that.

In other GTA-related news: Nerd entitlement at its finest. Not enough lols in the world.
_________________

[boojiboy7]

Yes, rockstar will totally release that because they need to generate hype around this.

oh wait.

[Dark Age Iron Savior]

The people signing it may often be idiots, but I don't see what's wrong with the request. It would be great if more companies released earlier builds of their games, especially when (like Rockstar) they don't have to worry about them affecting the sales of the final game significantly.

[boojiboy7]

True enough, but of all the companies to try to get that out of, Rockstar is almost Blizzard-like in their "we will show it to you when we want to".

Has there even been a demo of any previous GTA? I think the first two (the PC ones) had demos, but I can't think of any past that.

[Mr. Mechanical]

[Gorblax]

I was expecting that link to be something really unreasonable, but general tone aside I don't see why they shouldn't at least release the already finished demo some time in the Spring, when the game was originally set to be released.
_________________

[Gironika]

GT5 Prologue, ahem.



So I am glad this is getting released when it's <done>.
_________________

[Mr. Mechanical]

[Gorblax]

I concede.
_________________

[Mr. Mechanical]

That probably reads more argumentative than I intended it. No need to concede, I'm just needlessly verbose!
_________________

[Iacus]

I was going to comment that when studios say "we are taking a couple month to further polish the game" it usually means "oh shit guys the release date is coming soon and we still have to deal with lots of bugs / finish the game content"
_________________
Guayaba 2600

[parker]

And that was only like 3 or so months ago when they said they had just gotten the multiple characters thing working too. I kind of wish it was delayed until spring next year though just because I hate the fall/winter time.
_________________

[sticktion]

[Mr. Mechanical]

So I've been thinking about money lately. In GTA games all it's ever been is just a souped up score that you can spend on weapons/armor/police bribes/hospital visits (and clothing if you want). But during the last wave of GTA V previews it was mentioned that money was going to play a more important role in the game. Dan Houser said something to the effect of "We don't know exactly how it's going to work out yet but money will be an actual, useful part of the rest of the game's dynamics".

Now they've been saying since before Vice City that the next game is going to change up how you use money so that it becomes something more than just a score. So I'm not really expecting anything different with this new game but I was thinking about ways in which you could actually make money useful and dynamic.

One of the ways that's immediately apparent to me is making it so you have to pay rent to stay at a safe house and if you save up enough money you can just buy it outright. It sounds like it would be neat if you have to pay a certain amount of money every so often to maintain a safe house and the more safe houses you had the more money you had to pay. And if you couldn't afford it you'd have to sleep on the street like a hobo (time would only move forward by three hours when sleeping on the street than the usual six you get with a bed, of course) or maybe if you've managed to get in close enough with one of your buddies they'd let you crash on their couch for a while or whatever (but not for free, of course, because they have to pay rent too but just at a reduced price if they like you enough).

Just adding in rents would go a long way towards making the other money generating systems like the side jobs more of a necessity than not (but still be entirely optional for the player that doesn't want to bother with them) and also make the friends/relationship system more useful as well. Really rents could make everything in the game way more interconnected and dynamic.

Also I think they would have to change how much money you get from each activity. So side jobs would have a relatively meager payout each time but they'd be steady if you wanted to keep doing them. Everything could be more expensive in general and with the recurring charges from things like rents on top of it the payouts from doing the main story missions would actually mean something because then you might be able to afford a safe house of your own and knock out one of the rents.

Really I guess I'm just thinking the game might be more interesting in general if you were constantly only ever able to just scrape by and always having to figure out where your next paycheck is coming from, rather than how it's been where not even halfway through the game you usually have more money accumulated than you'll ever need.

The optimistic side of me is hoping that Rockstar is having these same thoughts and generally coming to similar conclusions (I've actually thought about posting this on GTA fan forums and emailing it to them and such to try and increase the odds they'll see the idea and consider it). But the pessimistic side of me has a feeling that they're not really going to change the fundamentals of it like adding in rents would but instead are just going to try adding more things for the player to buy like clothing and maybe weapon mods and optional safe houses and such, in which case it might take slightly longer but you'll eventually reach a point where money is effectively meaningless because you'll have bought all the stuff you care about but still be making money hand over fist.

So yeah those are just some random musings about Money in GTA Games.
_________________

[shrugtheironteacup]

Sounds like a great formula for making a videogame that simulates the desperate tedium of my own life.
_________________

[Mr. Mechanical]

Exactly what I'm trying to get at! That's sort of how my life is going right now too which is probably why I was thinking about it to begin with. Like, I've noticed that it doesn't seem to matter how much or how hard you work there will always be something there that you need to spend that money on, whether it's a rent or just the groceries for the week or whatever. I have a dog I need to get spayed right now so most of my next paycheck will be going towards that. And I'm someone who actively tries to save as much as I can from each paycheck but there are still needs that vacuum almost all of it up.

I guess it comes down to what GTA is really trying to do. Is it art imitating life or the reverse or what? Probably just escapism, in which case nobody desires rents but I want the game to evolve beyond just the graphics.
_________________

[evnvnv]

gta will not be complete until they work in federal surveillance and gvmnt assassination plots into the endgame kingpin sections. i want the game to induce joe pesci in casino levels of paranoia. also to go to jail for tax evasion
_________________
The text will not live forever. The cup are small

[Mr. Mechanical]

I guess now is a good time to ask: Is anyone here planning on playing multiplayer much and if so on what system? I was thinking I might shell out for a year's worth of Xbox live gold if there are some people on here who'd be interested in playing regularly.

I was thinking about getting a PS3 again though, especially if that version turns out to be considerably better than the 360 version (like, better draw distances, less pop-in/lag, that sort of thing), in which case I could play with anyone on PS3. But I don't have a PS3 at the moment and we probably won't know if there's any real difference between versions until after the game is out so I'll probably just play it on Xbox for right now.
_________________

[parker]

Mr Mechanical, I need you by my side in the Stealworkers Union on ps3. Me and my brother at least will be living on there once this thing's out. Paying for online multiplayer in the 21st century is ridiculous anyway. Do the less ridiculous thing, rebuy a whole other console you already used to own. I need solid guys to help me hurt the IGN crew.
_________________

[Mr. Mechanical]

Man I really would like to play with you parker, for reals. Gah it is all so ridiculous isn't it. This would be my third PS3 and I'd be getting it the same year the PS4 comes out. I guess Sony will continue to support the PS3 for a good while though? And there are all those PSN store games like Journey that I never got to check out...

Looking at PS3 prices right now and it's doable as far as affordability goes. They've come a long way from "599 US DOLLARS". Guess I'll add one to my ever growing list of stuff I'm saving up for. See you in September.

edit-It occurs to me that I work nights and am off Sundays and Tuesdays so I'm not sure exactly how often I'd really be able to play with other people. Hrm I still want another PS3 though lol. So ridiculous.
_________________

[Iacus]

Is GTAV not coming to the PS4?
_________________
Guayaba 2600

[Mr. Mechanical]

[parker]

I hope if there's a cameo of Johnny Klebitz it's not in a burgershot commercial asking somebody if they want fries with that, I don't think I could handle it.
_________________

[Mr. Mechanical]

[remote]

Yeah, if I do any multiplayer with this game it'll be when the PC version comes out.

I'm a little more excited about SR4 on that front tbh, but I would imagine GTA5 will be a stronger solo play experience. Well, we'll see.
_________________

letterboxd | last.fm | steam

[Mr. Mechanical]

Yeah SR4 should be really good. I still need to finish 3 though. I finished 2 a while back and one of the end-game missions has you going into an underground research base where Ultor is developing mining technology for off-planet use. Then I remembered that Ultor was the corporation in the Red Faction games (which were also made by Volition) and it clicked for me that Saints Row and Red Faction both take place in the same universe. I liked that little revelation.

Really hope Volition can keep their heads above water. I like them as developers and even played the first Descent game back when it was new (with a joystick and everything). Seemed like they were having some financial troubles last year, or maybe that was just THQ.
_________________

[scratchmonkey]

I think that was mainly THQ. They're under the Deep Silver publishing label for Koch Media now (not *those* Kochs, these are Germans), so they should be alright, as I imagine SR is a profitable franchise.

[Iacus]

I also have to finish SR3.
I'd like to play co-op with someone when I do. but I won't start the game until I get a new computer, so that may take a while.
_________________
Guayaba 2600