Grand Theft Auto V Announced

[Bolivar]

#GTAV

As the site says, trailer incoming on November 2nd.

All I have to ask is, why? Why not make a trilogy based on GTA IV for the current generation like they did last gen? In this day and age, are big pubs afraid to ship anything without a sequential number on it? Do you think they took to heart some of the fan reactions to GTA IV and are just going over it? It just kinda seems to me like Rockstar North are another one of those developers who should have been doing a lot more than they have on this iteration of console, and this generation will be a lot worse off for it in history.

[Pike]

WAIT

WHERE IS IT SET

[Loony BoB]

WAIT

WHERE IS IT SET

I wish they'd do one in an Edinburgh-like setting. I stand outside Rockstar North every day on the way to work, and look around the city and think "This place is freaking perfect for a GTA game. Why not?"

As for "Why do a sequel, they could do a trilogy" - well, SE do a group of games and they are slated for it, now you're slating GTA for doing the opposite? If it's a GTA game, it deserves to have "Grand Theft Auto" in the title. If it's in a new location then they have every right to name it GTA V.

[CimminyCricket]

I googled this a week ago. I am pretty excited.

[Bubba]

Unless it's set in Manchester I won't be buying it. GTA IV looked amazing but I've become rather bored with the formula. The series peaked at San Andreas in my opinion. I used to spend hours in the pub playing pool with the locals.

[Bolivar]

As for "Why do a sequel, they could do a trilogy" - well, SE do a group of games and they are slated for it, now you're slating GTA for doing the opposite? If it's a GTA game, it deserves to have "Grand Theft Auto" in the title. If it's in a new location then they have every right to name it GTA V.

I doubt I really need to explain it to you, BoB. In the case of numbering, I feel a GTA has to live up to that title, use a new engine, or be a leap instead of an iteration of the previous games. This is what they did last generation - GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas. The GTA III trilogy. Each built up upon the previous one, but the real leap didn't come until GTA IV.

I mean with FF and GTA, what they're numbered and how the franchise expands, we're kinda comparing apples to oranges here and I feel that should be obvious.

[Slothy]

Each built up upon the previous one, but the real leap didn't come until GTA IV.

The only leap GTAIV took though was a technological one. In terms of gameplay it was a massive leap backwards from the previous few games.

I'm interested in V only in so far as I want to see if they do an about face on some of the decisions they made in IV. Chief among them being the god awful mini games that you had to do in order to maintain relationships and reap the benefits that came with them. Some more interesting characters wouldn't hurt either.

[Loony BoB]

The only leap GTAIV took though was a technological one. In terms of gameplay it was a massive leap backwards from the previous few games.

Yeah, this covers my thoughts pretty well. It was the most boring of the series to date, for me.

[Old Manus]

In this day and age, are big pubs afraid to ship anything without a sequential number on it? Do you think they took to heart some of the fan reactions to GTA IV and are just going over it? It just kinda seems to me like Rockstar North are another one of those developers who should have been doing a lot more than they have on this iteration of console, and this generation will be a lot worse off for it in history.

I like how you're getting all this from the words GRAND, THEFT, and AUTO in size 96 font on an otherwise blank page on their website. I eagerly await your full review of the game on November 4th.

[I Don't Need A Name]

I won't be getting it, needless to say. The series ended after GTA2 for me.

But I have no quibbles with it being GTA V. They've moved on from IV, it's been a while since its release. And also, they had the Ballad of Gay Tony etc for GTA IV, so it's already had it's expansions.

And I find, on this rare occasion, that Manus has hit the nail on the head.

[Psychotic]

GTA IV vanilla game was okay. There was some sharp writing, the ragdoll physics engine was incredible, and the multiplayer was a blast. However many of the missions were repetetive and entirely too scripted, and many of the characters around the middle of the game were bland compared to the brilliance of the likes of Little Jacob and Brucie. The Lost and the Damned and Ballad of Gay Tony improved GTA IV immensely. However, Saints Row 2 surpassed it, and if The Third is half as good as it looks, I think it's safe to say Saints Row has surpassed it as the premier open world crime franchise. I am more excited for The Third than I am for V, which speaks volumes seeing as I was the biggest lover of GTA this forum has ever seen! As bubbaforever said, the series peaked with San Andreas. I would rather see Rockstar (I appreciate it's a different in-house development studio) make another Bully or Red Dead than another GTA though.

Ramblings aside, I am still genuinely looking forward to learning more about it and I will definitely get it regardless.

Also seriously next person to post "GTA SHOULD BE SET IN MY CITY" gets banned.

Also also, SERIOUSLY, announce Bully 2 you s

[Madame Adequate]

Like Paul I'm way more excited for SRTT than GTAV. But we'll have to see where V is set and what route they're taking with it. I'm sure it'll be an amazing smurfing game, and I've no problem with it being story and character-oriented, but they do need to learn when driving across town YET AGAIN is a bit much.

I still want an open-world crime game set in the middle future. The nearest is Red Faction: Guerrilla but... I want to play a regular GTA/SR game except in a huge dystopian metropolis.

[Bolivar]

^ I think a lot of people feel the same way as you guys. I've never gotten into Saints Row but I know they've kinda blown R* out of the water when it comes to the crazy rampaging which a lot of people play it for.

The only leap GTAIV took though was a technological one. In terms of gameplay it was a massive leap backwards from the previous few games.

Admittedly, that's most of what I was talking about, how VC and SA iterated upon the GTA III engine. But you also have to admit that they brought in a cover system which changed the gameplay a bit; the physics, especially driving, were a lot more in-depth; if I'm not mistaken its the first game in the series to try to faithfully recreate real world landmarks; It had branching plot lines; and it entered the age of always-online consoles by introducing competitive multiplayer. We can debate how those modes stack up to the heavyweights of the genre, but I know I had a lot of fun playing some of them. I don't think you can deny how much it brought to the series. Doubting its success is an understandable position, though.

I like how you're getting all this from the words GRAND, THEFT, and AUTO in size 96 font on an otherwise blank page on their website. I eagerly await your full review of the game on November 4th.

It just seems strange considering their model last generation. 3 years from GTA III we had two full games which were considerably larger in scope than the original, in San Andreas' case, vastly larger. 3 years after GTA IV, we've had two expansions.

[Pete for President]

Ah the GTA series... lacking atmosphere since 2002. Unless this game goes back to it's mob roots and leaves it's current one-man-army-but-hold-my-hand-gameplay behind, I'm not interested.

[Depression Moon]

I want a Bully 2 too. As far as this game goes I'm wondering if it's going to be set in Liberty City again. I, III, and IV were all in Liberty City.