×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

GTA IV Trailer Inflames Big Apple Politicians

CowboyNeal posted more than 7 years ago | from the not-on-our-watch dept.

158

GP writes "The GTA4 trailer isn't 48 hours old yet, but NYC politicians are up in arms because the game's setting, Liberty City, is a virtual version of the Big Apple." Obviously these guys never played GTA3, since it was also set in the "fictional" Liberty City, that also felt a lot like NYC.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

MOD THE TROLL DOWN!!! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556047)

MOD THE TROLL DOWN!!!

Up in arms? (5, Insightful)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556061)

They're not up in arms. Some uppity reporter went to the Mayor and the council and said, "Hey, Grand Theft Auto is set in NYC. What's your response?" And neither reponse was particularly vitriolic. Much ado about nothing.

Re:Up in arms? (5, Informative)

EveryNickIsTaken (1054794) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556077)

Just realized.. The submitter created this story in order to generate traffic to his site. Good work, assclown.

Re:Up in arms? (5, Informative)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556123)

Yup. Could the /. editors stop these nonsense advertisement ploys? Good lord...

Tom

Re:Up in arms? (5, Funny)

HillaryWBush (882804) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556157)

I'd like to complain too since it will give me some karma.

MOD PARENT FUNNY (0)

UbuntuDupe (970646) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556643)

Sorry, I haven't laughed that hard in a long time :-P

Re:Up in arms? (2, Funny)

DreadPiratePizz (803402) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556999)

10% offtopic and 90% funny? Looks like you LOST karma!

Re:Up in arms? (1)

HillaryWBush (882804) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557541)

Yep, another dupe!

Re:Up in arms? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556163)

Yup. Could the /. editors stop these nonsense advertisement ploys? Good lord...

I fully agree with this sentiment! I've put up a rant about this horrendous practice, along with a petition to the slashdot editors that everyone should sign. You can find these on my blog. [blogspot.com]

Re:Up in arms? (1)

P2PDaemon (723609) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556195)

"The requested URL was not found on this server." And here I was hoping I could subscribe to your newsletter...

And give up their kickbacks? R U Serious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556279)

You must be new here. Slashvertisements aree the rule, not the exception.

Re:Up in arms? (0, Offtopic)

Dun Malg (230075) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556363)

Yup. Could the /. editors stop these nonsense advertisement ploys? Good lord...

Tom
You misspelled "janitors".

The chimps that work at slashdot are anything but "editors".

Re:Up in arms? (5, Funny)

Alastor187 (593341) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556701)

This is why I never RTFA until after I post a comment.

Re:Up in arms? (2, Informative)

gorbachev (512743) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556289)

Uh, no.

GamePolitics.com is a site that covers video game stories that touch on politics. This is a story that was created elsewhere (like the first poster mentioned) and is exactly the sort of a story GamePolitics.com covers.

They don't need the /. traffic, they get plenty without.

Re:Up in arms? (1)

StreetStealth (980200) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557387)

Oh, come on; it's not like anyone ever reads the stories around here!

ATTN: SWITCHEURS! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556177)

If you don't know what Cmd-Shift-1 and Cmd-Shift-2 are for, GTFO.
If you think Firefox is a decent Mac application, GTFO.
If you're still looking for the "maximize" button, GTFO.
If you don't know Clarus from Carl Sagan, GTFO.

Bandwagon jumpers are not welcome among real Mac users [atspace.com] . Keep your filthy PC fingers to yourself.

NB: Blantant Self Promotion. Ignore Story, please. (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556219)

annoyance.

Oooh! (5, Funny)

MWoody (222806) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556069)

Setting Grand Theft Auto in the safest big city in America would be like setting Halo in Disneyland.

I think I speak for all gamers when I say this would, indeed, be awesome.

Rumour has it......... (1)

germansausage (682057) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556119)

I read on Slashdot today that they're going to set the next Halo in Disneyland. Really.....It's true...Thats right, Slashdot.

Re:Oooh! (1)

Adriax (746043) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556407)

God damnit, master cheif in the shiney light-up mouse ears we now sell is a mental image I never wanted...

Re:Oooh! (2, Funny)

Pyrrhic Diarrhea (1061530) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556417)

It could have been worse--they could set Halo in NYC. The game would end with Bloomberg eating a teabag on the steps of City Hall and that old gnarly drill sarge guy saying "did I give you permission to bitch?"

Re:Oooh! (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556549)

Not really, would you really want to wait in line for an hour at the beginning of each level? Red vs. Blue could probably make something of it, but I don't think it'd make a very fun game.

Politicians. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556091)

My summary of the article is:

[insert politician's name here] Blah, blah, blah! Grandstand, grandstand, grandstand! Outrage!

Two weeks from now, nobody will even remember this "outrage".

It's wasn't even worth reading. All the game maker has to do is release some statement to appease the politicians so that they don't go off and pass some knee-jerk legislation that'll cost a lot of taxpayer money when it gets challenged in court.

And no, these politicians do not deserve my respect because they haven't earned it.

Re:Politicians. (5, Informative)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556209)

No one was outraged.

"Setting Grand Theft Auto in the safest big city in America would be like setting Halo in Disneyland."
No outrage there - just a politician answering a question asked by a reporter. He was spinning the question to point out how safe NYC is. There was no outrage.

"The mayor does not support any video game where you earn points for injuring or killing police officers."
This quip shows no signs of outrage either.

Re:Politicians. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557219)

THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!

Re:Politicians. (1)

Proofof. Chaos (1067060) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557323)

Blah, blah, blah! Grandstand, "Grand Theft Auto," grandstand! Claim of Outrage! [insert politician not disagreeing here] [insert politician not disagreeing here]. ----Instant News!
There, fixed that fer ya.
BTW, the politicians probably feel -and I would agree- that the game will be good for the city by generating tourism.

This from the city that (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556111)

brought us peed on dead guys on the street!

How terribly unfair (5, Funny)

Wuhao (471511) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556127)

This city is a completely unrealistic setting for a story about petty crime, gang violence and ethnicity-oriented organized crime. This is an affront to the citizens, and an insult to its elected officials who work hard to keep it clean. Liberty City is a finest city you will ever find, and for Rockstar to continue smearing it is abhorrent. Why can't they pick a genuine crime-infested hell hole, like New York?

Ok, and? (2, Funny)

squiggleslash (241428) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556145)

Obviously these guys never played GTA3...

Er, really? You think that huh?

Exactly what would lead you to write a sentence where you'd seriously think it's in question whether politicians who have no understanding whatsoever of video games would have played a particular one in the first place?

Run your city and quit whining (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556147)

Hey, if you're going to have your game take place in a huge, crime-infested, urine-soaked hellhole, it just makes sense to model it after a real-life, crime-infested, urine-soaked hellhole!

Re:Run your city and quit whining (1)

John Courtland (585609) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556941)

The panel would prefer you use the term "peepee-soaked, heckhole."

that's not new york city. (2, Funny)

vena (318873) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557095)

that's washington, dc.

Re:Run your city and quit whining (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557213)

fuck you. Your city can suck my dick.

The reason NYC politicians are up in arms (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556169)

New GTA missions include smoking in public, rampant ingestion of trans fats, distribution of black market foie gras, and preemptive spying on puppet people.

What kind of message does this send to the kids?

Politicians should be mad! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556181)

Leave the violence and wars up to them! You're too stupid to know fiction from reality, and besides, these videogames are interfering with the real-life violence politicians work so hard to bring to your TV sets every night.

But (1)

mixxu (1076713) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556185)

does gta 4 feature "Kill the politicians" like vice city had it's "kill the haitians"?

I was more impressed (2, Funny)

cno3 (197688) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556193)

That Peter Vallone not only knows of, but has apparently played Halo!

Seriously, this is a gigantic non-story. The two best pull quotes they could manage say nothing directly negative about the game at all.

When "Slow News Day" is way too fast (5, Interesting)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556267)

How 'bout "Dead Stop News Day"?

Meanwhile, the house committee [house.gov] on "intellectual property" ponders how to implement a licensing regime for ephemeral copies of recordings each time they pass through a computer's RAM.

Sorry, I know I'm not supposed to bitch about rejected stories or (in this case) ones that have been pending for a week... couldn't help it this one time.

lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556933)

You just know that later today or tomorrow some ass is going to submit your rejected story and get it accepted.

Thank Goodness... (5, Insightful)

FREAKHEAD (987013) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556203)

...that we have movies that only reflect the great qualities of that city. If movies showed violence, cop killing, etc in N.Y., I am sure we would see equal outrage.

Re:Thank Goodness... (0, Troll)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556527)

The movies pay a royalty for using the likeness of cities in most circumstances. If there was an outrage, it would likely be over not getting their cut.

This is one reason you see LA being called NYC or NYC being called Chicago in some movies. It isn't because they can't read a map, rather because Once city lets them shoot cheaper then another and the story says it is a certain city. If you come from these places, you will see stunning similarities in the skyline. Although now it is possible to add landmarks relatively easily making it more easy to do this.

Re:Thank Goodness... (1)

The PS3 Will Fail (998952) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556837)

"The movies pay a royalty for using the likeness of cities in most circumstances."
That is absurd. The likeness of a city is not protected under any law. Do you have any proof to back up that statement?

Re:Thank Goodness... (2, Interesting)

Bottlemaster (449635) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557559)

That is absurd. The likeness of a city is not protected under any law. Do you have any proof to back up that statement?
This anecdote isn't proof, but it is relevant. Also, spoiler warning.

The commentary track on the Fight Club DVD claims that to avoid the possibility of lawsuits, all the skyscrapers shown destroyed at the end of the film are likenesses of buildings owned by News Corporation (parent of 20th Century Fox) or its subsidiaries.

Re:Thank Goodness... (1)

znu (31198) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557179)

This is complete nonsense. There is no royalty required to use the "likeness" of a city. NYC doesn't even charge for shooting permits; you can literally get a permit and close down streets for a shoot without paying the city a dime. City and state governments want to attract filmmakers not because they get money directly, but because it results in money being spent in local economies and it promotes tourism.

Some distinctive buildings may have copyrighted designs. The Chrysler building, for instance. But courts have ruled that even in these cases, the building owners only have a claim if the building itself is a major element of a shot. A shot of the NYC skyline, for instance, even if the Chrysler building is clearly visible, can't get you into any trouble.

Re:Thank Goodness... (1)

j-pimp (177072) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557923)

This is complete nonsense. There is no royalty required to use the "likeness" of a city. NYC doesn't even charge for shooting permits; you can literally get a permit and close down streets for a shoot without paying the city a dime.

Not entirely true. The permit is free, but you have to pay for police and traffic officers that are assigned to your detail. The city decides if you need police and traffic enforcement officers. Actually closing down a whole city street involves police and traffic officer involvement. That being said, you can setup cameras on a sidewalk and get a parking permit for a few vans if your doing a low budget movie not involving anything like a chase scene. Also, you only need a permit if your putting a tripod down on the ground. You can use hand held and shoulder mounted cameras without a permit.

Re:Thank Goodness... (0)

Pink Tinkletini (978889) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557863)

Good Christ, if you don't have a clue, PLEASE don't fuck up the discussion by injecting your little opinion turds as though they were fact. Many large cities, including New York, actually pay productions to shoot in the city, in the form of tax breaks, dedicated police units, parking permits, etc. This is meant to encourage business, and it seems to work.

GTA III wasn't the same... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556223)

The liberty city in GTA III had a passing resemblence to NYC. If you knew where to look and read between the lines. GTA IV is absolutely blatant. You can't NOT see it, even if you tried. Statue of Liberty, Brooklyn Bridge, Chrystler Building, and Times Square all make an apearance in the trailer. These are iconic New York City to the world, and all of these things were missing in the earlier versions of the GTA franchise.

Re:GTA III wasn't the same... (1)

cno3 (197688) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557807)

You know what other fictional city bears more than a striking resemblance to New York? Gotham City. Hopefully the New York Daily News reporters can demonstrate due diligance in getting Bloomberg to deny the existence of caped crusaders dressed as bats roaming the city at night, on the record of course.

Trailer influenced by Koyaanisqatsi (1)

maynard (3337) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556227)

Love how that trailer is so obviously influenced by Reggio's cityscape stop motion work inKoyaanisqatsi [imdb.com] combined with Philip Glass' music. Heh.

Good Heavens... (1)

PipOC (886408) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556231)

...it's as though they're suggesting there's crime in New York. Who would think of such a blatant lie?

Safest? (4, Interesting)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556269)

I live near Chicago ( Joliet ) and travel extensively through ought the USA. "Safest"? and New York do not belong in the same sentence in my opinion. To me, New York is just NASTY. I did a job just across the Brooklyn Bridge in Williamsburg at a public housing project. The guards there leave after dark for fear of being shot.

I think one of the reasons that New York politico's don't like the New York / Liberty City parallel is that it is just to close to home, and NYC really is very similar to the virtual world inside GTA.

Chicago is a much nicer, safer, cleaner and just better city than New York. Notice that game makers don't generally use it.

Cheers

 

Re:Safest? (4, Informative)

Pink Tinkletini (978889) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556357)

Chicago's a much nicer place than New York in a lot of ways, and even more forward-thinking—the greenroofs movement in private development, for example—but New York is still the safest big city [google.com] in the country according to the FBI's comprehensive crime statistics, as it has been for many years. It's safer than most suburbs too, for that matter, thanks to its population density.

Re:Safest? (2, Insightful)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556581)

You can thank former mayor juliani (however it is spelled)for that.

I remember going into NYC back in the early 90's and it was scary. You could see a difference after he became mayor and this difference was more rvident the more the news stations complained about him. I guess he created a floating precinct idea were an entire police station was mobile and could be located where ever the need for extra enforcement popped up in less then 24 hours.

He was also accused of many civil rights violations and such but I think the real turning point was that some criminals were only opportunists and once the likelihood of getting caught was there, they passed on this opportunity.

Re:Safest? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557483)

You could see a difference after he became mayor and this difference was more rvident the more the news stations complained about him. I guess he created a floating precinct idea were an entire police station was mobile and could be located where ever the need for extra enforcement popped up in less then 24 hours.

His greatest success was reducing the bureaucracy and letting the departments solve problems at the lowest possible level. This is the opposite of rigid bureaucratic systems like the French National Police which treat different areas with only one sized brush. If one precinct wants to target jaywalkers, so be it. And if they need help the department could change at a moments notice to move 20 cops to traffic patrols or identity theft investigations, or whatever else was needed. Instead of passing new laws like most politicians he used the laws already passed and worked within the system. If shoplifting went up 10% in the city he didn't ask to raise the penalty for shoplifting, he just assigned more cops to enforce the laws. Crazy ideas!

If only we would do that in the rest of the country (of course, without micromanaging). How many times have the penalties for drug offenses been raised with nothing to show for it? Or the penalties for littering or speeding? The $400 fines for littering and $150 traffic tickets have done nothing to stop either.

Re:Safest? (4, Insightful)

badasscat (563442) | more than 7 years ago | (#18558003)

You can thank former mayor juliani (however it is spelled)for that.

Crime was dropping before Giuliani took office. And it's dropped faster under Bloomberg than it did under Giuliani.

Crime dropped *nationwide* while Giuliani was in office, largely as a result of Bill Clinton's initiatives in both crime prevention (through educational programs, etc.) and in enforcement (100,000 new officers nationwide for community policing, of which about 5,000 ended up in NYC - that's 5,000 cops walking the beat that the city never had before, and Giuliani had nothing to do with them).

I guess he created a floating precinct idea were an entire police station was mobile and could be located where ever the need for extra enforcement popped up in less then 24 hours.

There's no such thing as a "floating precinct". William Bratton and his lieutenants came up with most of the ideas that lowered crime, but the two biggest things that you can credit from an enforcement standpoint are just those 5,000 extra cops and the computerized COMPSTAT crime tracking system that was both devised and implemented by deputy commissioner Jack Maple.

Since 9/11, Giuliani gets credit for way too many things that he had little or nothing to do with. Most New Yorkers did not like him in the waning days of his mayoralty, and most credited Bratton and Clinton more with the reduction in crime than Giuliani. (I'm not sure if you can still find old gallup polls anywhere, but the polls did reflect that.)

And how did Giuliani repay Bratton for his hard work? By asking for his resignation and hiring Bernard Kerik, a personal friend with ties to the mafia, to replace him.

You're going to be hearing about this a lot more if Giuliani presses ahead with his presidential campaign.

Re:Safest? (4, Funny)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556369)

Chicago is a much nicer, safer, cleaner and just better city than New York.

...with apparently a massive inferiority complex.

Re:Safest? (1)

SwedishPenguin (1035756) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556375)

New York is in fact the safest large city in the US according to statistics. Chicago has a murder rate about twice that of NYC. Of course, if one were to compare on an international level, they're both dangerous compared to the rest of the "developed" world.

Re:Safest? (1)

Pink Tinkletini (978889) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556419)

BTW, the New York you describe is very hard to reconcile with the New York I know. Just across the Brooklyn Bridge is nowhere near Williamsburg. Perhaps you meant the Williamsburg bridge? Or were you working in Brooklyn Heights? I can't think of any public housing projects near either.

Re:Safest? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556433)

Sec-ond City! Sec-ond City! Why don't you actually look up to stats, aren't you the Murder Capital of the USA almost every year?

Re:Safest? (4, Insightful)

TodMinuit (1026042) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556447)

Chicago is a much nicer, safer, cleaner and just better city than New York. Notice that game makers don't generally use it.

That's because Chicago has something New York has long forgotten: Class. In Chicago, crime isn't spilling onto the streets. It's locked away in the Government itself.

If you wanted to set a crime game in Chicago, it'd have to be about stealing election votes, selling illegal drivers licenses, and collecting kick backs from major Government projects. The final mission would be to break into Meigs Field at 2AM and illegally destroy the runways (using tax-payer funded crews, no less).

In some places, it's called the mafia. In Chicago, it's called the Government.

Re:Safest? (1)

chromatic (9471) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557775)

Don't forget painting your name on all of the trash cans in the city. That still makes me laugh.

Re:Safest? (2, Interesting)

codeshack (753630) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556499)

Erm, Williamsburg isn't near the Brooklyn Bridge. As I write this, from my apartment about ten blocks from the middle of Williamsburg, in a lovely, safe, neighborhood, I am somewhat confused as to what you're talking about. Plus, I'm sure Chicago's housing projects are just delightful. Where was that Cabrini-Green place again?

Williamsburg is over (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556569)

Which of these hipster scum [atspace.com] is you?

Re:Safest? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556553)

I live near Chicago ( Joliet ) and travel extensively through ought the USA. "Safest"? and New York do not belong in the same sentence in my opinion.
Chicago has roughly the same murder rate as New York, but half as many people.
Therefore, Chicago has a murder rate that is around twice has high.

For its size, NY has a low *reported* crime rate compared to smaller cities.
But you should always take all crime statistics with a grain of salt.

That said, my skepticism still doesn't detract from the fact that NY has made a lot of progress in its efforts to lower crime.

P.S. Every city has areas where it is not safe after dark. Chicago included.

Re:Safest? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556647)

Every city has areas where it is not safe after dark. Chicago included.

Obviously you've never been to Tokyo.

Re:Safest? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556571)

Uh, no it isn't.

Chicago is one of the cities constantly having the most murders in it.

DC has the most per capita.

Re:Safest? (1)

bigbigbison (104532) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556801)

Safest is of course relative. In the county I was born in the only murder that happened there in years was some guy who happened to be driving through when he decided to kill his wife. That was 5 years ago.
I doubt the "safest" city in the USA can say the same thing.

Re:Safest? (1)

IceCreamGuy (904648) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557419)

Too bad their pizza sucks. And by pizza, I mean the sauce and bread soup they call pizza in Chicago. NYC has them beat there. I'm still waiting for GTA Baltimore, though. "GTA: Loch Raven Stories."

Re:Safest? (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557811)

its not that bad in ny :) been here my whole life. NYC is pretty safe overall. There are a few trouble spots but even they're not as bad as it seems. Yes there are housing projects, but dont forget people do live there, and not all of them are criminals. It just happens that there are criminals in those areas because they live in a poorer community, inside the big rich apple. You have extreme wealth and extreme poor, all at a subways distance.

Re:Safest? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557913)

FYP:

Chicago is a much lamer city than New York

Re:Safest? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557993)

I see the rest of the world has, once again, been left out of the equation. Not that I'm at all surprised, as Americans tend to think only of themselves. So how would NYC compare to other places in the world, say Bombay, São Paulo, Hong Kong or even London?

Rockstar Games to NYC City Council (4, Funny)

gorbachev (512743) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556303)

Thanks for the advertisement, we sure appreciate it.

*laugh all the way to the bank*

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556309)

There was also a GTA game based on London. It was called GTA London.

hmm (2, Interesting)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556349)

Obviously these guys never played GTA3, since it was also set in the "fictional" Liberty City, that also felt a lot like NYC

It felt nothing like NYC. Seriously, Rockstar hasn't really done a good job capturing the feel of the cities they parallel. Vice City didn't feel like Miami either.

Re:hmm (1)

psychokitten (819123) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556449)

On the same token, I don't really think Rockstar's as-of-yet TRIED to go very far in capturing the feel of the real-life cities they base their settings in. I think their foremost concern is making the cities the most fun for driving really fast, and blowing up lots of stuff. If they strive for more realism though - just imaging the thrilling white knuckle car chases through downtown Manhattan during rush hour! Er... wait...

Re:hmm (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556621)

It isn't what you think it is like, It is what I tell you to think it is like.

I think the perspective is off by default. If rockstar really did do this, they might have issues with the game being accurate enough to plan a crime and some grieving family trying to blame the guy with the most bucks.

Re:hmm (1)

Yeechang Lee (3429) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557299)

[Liberty City in GTAIII] felt nothing like NYC.

Agreed here. As one who grew up in Nu Yawk, I'm hard pressed to think of a single feature in that game's Liberty City that was reminiscent of the city in any way. It was very much a generic Hill Street Blues [wikipedia.org] -like "generic big Eastern/Northeastern US city."

Seriously, Rockstar hasn't really done a good job capturing the feel of the cities they parallel. Vice City didn't feel like Miami either.

Disagree here. Vice City, according to my friend who went to college at the University of Miami, was filled with things reminiscent of Miami.
The cities within the San Andreas is even more connected to its real-life counterparts. I lived in Las Vegas for two years and have lived in the San Francisco Bay area for seven, and I can testify that San Fierro (San Francisco) and Las Venturas (Las Vegas) are dead-on knockoffs of both cities. I've only briefly visited Los Santos (Los Angeles) but by all accounts [72.14.253.104] the two cities are just as much twins as the others. I know firsthand [google.com] that Santa Maria Beach is a *perfect* recreation of Santa Monica's Muscle Beach.

Based on the trailer, GTA IV's Liberty City will, as others have noted, be just as close a twin of a real-life city as Vice City and San Andreas are. I, for one, can't wait.

Sequel idea (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556391)

Set it in the Greater Toronto Area next time! GTA: GTA. ... anyone?

Re:Sequel idea (1)

sam991 (995040) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557037)

If i had mod points, i would so mod you up. But i don't, so you just get this lousy reply.

meaningless (1)

6-tew (1037428) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556431)

A journalist asks a politician about the inclusion of their voting jurisdiction in the latest instalment of one of the most controversial media franchises, and the politician say they are opposed to it out of fear of offending voters. This is what passes for news? GTA getting bad press is like politicians ducking bad press whenever they can, it is inevitable.

And what is so "unfortunate" about Take Two not wanting to comment? What are they going to say that we can not figure out on our own?

It is just a game for crying out loud. People NEED hobbies, especially if they spend their time attacking the hobbies of others. I guess that could be a hobby, but why not go fishing instead?

Game looks cool though.

Wait. . . (0, Offtopic)

Clock Nova (549733) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556523)

I'm confused. I thought that GTA3 was Vice City and GTA4 was San Andreas. Wouldn't that make this GTA5? Obviously I've never played a GTA game.

Re:Wait. . . (1)

Hard_Rock_2 (804967) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556575)

No there was GTA III, a GTA Vice City and a GTA San Andreas. But they are considered part of III I guess.

Re:Wait. . . (4, Informative)

PipOC (886408) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556577)

GTA 3, VC, and SA used the same engine, and are thus from the same generation, kind of like episodic content, while still being full length games. GTA 4 has a new game engine so it's a different generation. Though this distinction wasn't really maintained in GTA 1 and 2, as they used the same engine, as well as there being another game London 1969 between them.

Re:Wait. . . (1)

demeteloaf (865003) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556663)

Grand theft auto 1 and 2 were 2-d top down view games released on the playstation and PC (and dreamcast in the case of GTA2). GTA3 refers to the 3d game released on playstation 2. Vice City, San Andreas, and all the PSP games the other games that came after GTA3, while they may be sequels, did not recieve a number designation.

I suppose the major difference that gets GTA:IV its own number designation is the vastly improved graphics engine over all the GTA3 games.

flash 8 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556629)

rockstar tells me i have to have flash 8 installed to view the site.
BUT I have flash 9 installed.
IDIOTS!

Seriously.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556727)

I used to laugh at this type of suggestions before but this time it seems very likely to me that someone connected to Rockstar Games is deliberately trying to create some controversy about an already (in)famous title. This is as much of a non-story as there possibly can be and still its pretty clear some people are trying their best to create whatever shreds of controversy they can before the release. Seems like it has become the standard tactic before any big RockStar release lately.

I am willing to bet anything that soon that assclown Jack Thompson will hear about the game and spew some shit out, and we will be discussing all that right here on /.

[Posting Anon because I have already moderated in this thread.]

What the mayor really said (1)

thebigo195 (949864) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556737)

From TFA: "The mayor does not support any video game where you earn points for injuring or killing police officers" this is highly controversial...

Re:What the mayor really said (1)

Score Whore (32328) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557135)

It should be controversial. What's so special about police officers? Why doesn't his lack of support extend to any game where you kill people?

Good thing it wasn't Boston (2, Funny)

Nimey (114278) | more than 7 years ago | (#18556945)

If Rockstar had set IV in a virtual Boston, there's no telling /what/ the city government might have done. Detonate game boxes because they might be bombs, probably.

mod 3oWn (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556969)

Lay dOwn paper [goat.cx]

GP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18556989)

... We (the / community) are watching you and your little submission-whore ways.

Simpsons & Brazil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557033)

After Brazil was 'up in arms' over the Simpsons Brazil episode, the Simpsons have this conversation in the Barnacle Bay episode:

Lisa: Uck! This is the most disgusting place we've ever gone!
Bart: What about Brazil?
Lisa: After Brazil.

good idea (1)

nanosquid (1074949) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557403)

Setting Grand Theft Auto in the safest big city in America would be like setting Halo in Disneyland.

Seems like a good idea to me.

The mayor does not support any video game where you earn points for injuring or killing police officers.

That's OK. It's a video game, his "support" isn't required. A better question would be what kinds of killing Bloomberg actually does support.

Deus Ex? (1)

aldheorte (162967) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557447)

Wasn't "Liberty City" the name used for New York in Deus Ex?

Re:Deus Ex? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557911)

No, it was called "Manhattan".

And yet, Activison is off the hook? (1)

British (51765) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557497)

There was a game called "True Crime: NYC" that has frickin NYC in the title, that was a GTA-like game. I don't see anyone complaining about that.

Case closed.

Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#18557651)

If Rockstar hadn't already convinced me that the new GTA was going to be fantastic, this has surely done so now.

um... (2, Insightful)

syrinx (106469) | more than 7 years ago | (#18557951)

"Obviously these guys never played GTA3, since it was also set in the "fictional" Liberty City"

um... or the first GTA, which was the original source of the GTA Liberty City? seriously, can no one remember anything more than 3 years ago?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?