Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Worth of the GTA Franchise

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the what-is-it-worth-in-hooker-units? dept.

Games 128

GameDailyBiz has a piece analyzing the value of the Grand Theft Auto Franchise for developer Rockstar and publisher Take-Two Entertainment. At something like $900 Million over the next five years, the franchise is almost 80% of Take-Two's market value. From the article: " ... While it's hard to blame Take-Two for its reliance on a blockbuster franchise, eventually gamers are likely to tire of the GTA formula, or the games will no longer feel fresh when placed side-by-side with titles that perhaps improve on that formula. To be fair, Take-Two has made attempts to diversify itself through acquisitions and new IP, but the publisher's value right now is heavily dependent upon GTA and that could be a double-edged sword for potential suitors, or investors in general. "

cancel ×

128 comments

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

Bah. (5, Funny)

RandoX (828285) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671660)

GTA's not worth a cup of hot coffee.

GTA rocks! (5, Insightful)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671692)

GTA, IMO, is one of the best games ever. Not just for it's content but for it's gameplay. It is open ended in ways other games only wish they could be. I'd love to see Take Two team up with someone like Square to product a really open ended RPG style game that has a Final Fantasy feel and GTA's attitude. Something for us big kids. I think GTA itself is destined to become a great online game. City of Villians wants to be but doesn't have what it takes but I think GTA could do it because it's already open ended and fun. They just have to make it multiplayer which doesn't seem to much of a stretch for the game. You don't need to be the hero in GTA so the stories work better for the masses than in a game like Final Fantasy online. Gang wars, lone gunmen, etc could all be a lot of fun.

Re:GTA rocks! (0, Troll)

Dance_Dance_Karnov (793804) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671716)

Shill much?

Re:GTA rocks! (4, Insightful)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671754)

I'd love to see Take Two team up with someone like Square to product a really open ended RPG style game that has a Final Fantasy feel and GTA's attitude.

I think what makes GTA fun is that it is leaps and bounds ahead of other real life simulators. If you take something that engrossing and then replace "kill all the hatians" and "shoot up the mafia mansion" with "find my fish" and "deliver this block of wood to the next town" quests, it'll quickly dull :(

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671792)

Progress Quest [progressquest.com] much?

Xogkraev, 76th level Hunter-Stranger, Double Wookie

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

voice_of_all_reason (926702) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672180)

Yeah, I had a 64th level crested dwarf mage illusioner, non-multiplayer, about a year ago. Forgot all about it until today and just had to plug it :)

Progress Quest (1)

Sir Pallas (696783) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672042)

Progress Quest [progressquest.com] is all about "find my fish" and "deliver this block of wood to the next town" and it's never gotten boring. Maybe that's because one of my quests was to "placte the fire giants" and the next was to "exterminate the fire giants."

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672098)

You could give it a theme though without making it less realistic. That's the whole point. Most online RPG's are BORING AS HELL because they give you stupid little tasks to do and the game isn't much fun if you're not doing those tasks and the tasks themselves are usually more repetitive and frustrating than fun. You should be able to have open ended, basically pointless, fun. Get in fights, pillage, kill, steal, etc or if you enjoy it more form a citizen police force and go around catching people pillaging and kill them. Making it open ended and flexible is the key to it being fun. Let real people create quests for each other in order to move through the games society. Someone could become a mob boss of sorts and then send out minions to hassle rival gangs or newbies or whatever. It doesn't matter if you use guns, swords, magic, or whatever combination to act out these behaviors.

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

Schitzoflink (949390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676197)

Hell they could make three distinct types of themes, the Regualar GTA guy (criminal, builds criminal orgs) The Law (this would have to be new as the cops in previous GTA's have either been bumbling or "evil") And then some kind of mix between the two....so that in theory not only would it be the greatness of openended GTAness...but you could move around the ethical spectrum

Oh and PS love the idea about player made quests, I always have thought that would be a great way to build community and I guess I don't understand the limitations on why they havn't done it yet.

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671791)

Forget Multiplayer... what about making it massively multiplayer?

Wait... that'd be a bad idea. You'd end up with a lot of griefers running around sniping people.

FYI - there's already an online multiplayer game for GTA: SA http://www.mtavc.com/ [mtavc.com] is an online racing game :O)

Re:GTA rocks! (5, Insightful)

Max Threshold (540114) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672029)

GTA isn't really that open-ended. It's just that crashing cars and killing cops and prostitutes never gets old.

Re:GTA rocks! (4, Insightful)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672342)

That too. Still it lets you run around and do quite a lot without any real goal. More so than say Quake.

Re:GTA rocks! (2, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14674412)

Ever heard about stunting? A whole lot of people use GTA to make stunts in them and make videos out of them.

Actually I knew well what I'm talkin about since I'm doing a video too (to be released around when the next GTA comes out), and that's pretty much all I'm doing in GTA.

Was what what the game was designed to do? Was it really meant to be such a great stunting game? I doubt it, and that's what's cool about GTA, you can find it uses that the game wasn't designed for, and that you might call open-ended

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

kisrael (134664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676321)

Well, obviously the designers had stunting in mind a bit, which is why they stuck a number of ramps about, as well as "insane stunt" bonuses.

I agree stunters have pushed the envelope.

I love the one video that has an intermission that gets the cops to do lots of stupid stuff, usually ending up with them in the water, either in their car or not...

Re:GTA rocks! (4, Insightful)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672070)

A GTA style RPG is what I'm after, too. Kind of how the last two Zelda games had lots of little nooks and crannies to go and find stuff. Maybe Grand Theft Auto - Hyrule? ;-) I like exploring the back alleys and hidden canyons of well designed game worlds.

The wonderful thing about GTA3 and onward is that in addition to a good game, the game world is a fun *toy* to just mess about with. I got obsessed in GTA-SA with capturing gang turf. There was dozens of ways to pick a fight with rival gangs and execute the assault (landing a helicopter on some homies was a good one).

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

TouchOfRed (785130) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673779)

Somehow something gets lost in translation from kicking people out of their cars and motorcycles to kicking people off their horses or out of their carriages. Perhaps some GRAND THEFT OREGON TRAIL.

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

dohzer (867770) | more than 8 years ago | (#14674458)

I got obsessed in GTA-SA with capturing gang turf.

So you capture all the turf and are finally glad it's all over.
Then you get kicked out of the city, and have to re-capture it all again :(

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

Schitzoflink (949390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676205)

Thats even better...bitches took my turf...makes it more satisfying...I think i'm on my 4-5th playthrough this time i'm going for the 100%, and this is the only GTA that hasn't been more fun to cheat...though running from the cops with the jetpack is very fun, but nothing beats getting in the back of a pickup, scaring the driver, then sitting in the back shooting people while the cops chase you.

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676285)

Grand Theft Auto - Hyrule?

Grand Theft Triforce ?

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

Schitzoflink (949390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676362)

GTA: Midgard

Re:GTA rocks! (1)

kisrael (134664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676340)

I love Zelda for what it is, but all the nooks and crannies feel very planted....you get the feeling Hyrule wouldn't exist withou a guy link to run around in it, but GTAs' worlds seem much closer to "living breathing" cities...

I think GTA is getting watered down (2, Insightful)

knight37 (864173) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671703)

I think we're starting to see the inevitable dilution of the GTA franchise. GTASA was a good game, but I'm not sure really how much further they can go with the same idea over and over. It's not enough to have better graphics and stuff, they need to evolve the gameplay, and not just in minor tweaks. I know the prospect of GTA LCS was not enough to get me to buy a PSP, because it didn't really sound like anything new.

Remember London? (4, Interesting)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671774)

It's not enough to have better graphics and stuff, they need to evolve the gameplay, and not just in minor tweaks.

I recall GTA: London 1969, which is still probably my favourite GTA game - simply because it let me play at being Michael Caine. I drove madly around that map on a variety of exciting heists all the while singing The Self-Preservation Society very loudly. And then got on a scooter and zipped around with some Mods. And then there were James Bond missions. All a wonderful parody of a certain era.

It was too short. It was too easy. But damn, it was fun while it lasted.

So: my proposal for the next instalment of GTA?

GTA: Tokyo 2050.

Just imagine it. GTA... except the most expensive sports cars can fly, and if you piss off the military then they turn up in tanks that transform into mecha. A futuristic GTA playing off anime and SF cliches, with fully destructible buildings - which will, of course, have been mysteriously repaired by the Tokyo Police Cataclysm Division when you come back to the same spot ten minutes later...

Re:Remember London? (2, Funny)

damsa (840364) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672104)

GTA: Endor, you can go around as a wookie and beat up Ewok hookers, run away from storm troopers etc.

Re:Remember London? (1)

apoc06 (853263) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672151)

great idea, but word on the street is that the next GTA will probably take place in london.

Re:Remember London? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14674209)

Come to think of it every GTA has been set in an english speaking country, better brush up on my japanese...

Re:Remember London? (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 8 years ago | (#14674396)

It might take place in Tokyo, but certainly not in 2050.

There's been a thread on it on some popular GTA forum, and we all agreed to say that setting it in the future would suck.

However, the destructible environnement thing that respawns magically is a good idea, although you're not the first one to have it ;)

Re:Remember London? (1)

iainl (136759) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676022)

Personally, I rather liked GTA2. But I don't think it sold particularly well, because the fictional SF cars didn't have anything like the character of the 60s stuff.

So I agree, going back is better than forwards. I still maintain that San Andreas should have been set in the late 60s hippie era.

Re:Remember London? (1)

edenapple (953123) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676507)

I'm going for GTA: European Tour. Give us different cars in each country - Beamers, Ferarris, Renaults (laugh), etc...

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

williamhb (758070) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672334)

I think we're starting to see the inevitable dilution of the GTA franchise. GTASA was a good game, but I'm not sure really how much further they can go with the same idea over and over. It's not enough to have better graphics and stuff, they need to evolve the gameplay, and not just in minor tweaks.

I think you're one iteration short of true. GTA:SA sold rather well simply by being "bigger, and with more vehicles". That on its own won't work again, but MTA:SA (multiplayer race mod) is a very popular mod and seems like a very different game because of the pickups. A version of GTA for PS3 with vastly better graphics plus a level of internet multiplayer would probably sell like hotcakes. What can drive sales for the iteration after that it the tricky question.

(And hopefully the Hot Coffee incident will persuade them that the sales aren't best improved by jimmying in extra salaciousness to the story for the sake of it, but by the fun of hurtling round with vehicles and weapons with no real life consequences - so they don't need to work to push the censorial envelope for the sake of it)

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (4, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672389)

GTASA was a good game

GTA:SA Sucked!!!!

I loved the series up to that point, but then the first mission on GTA:SA began.

You go through a way-to-long series of really boring cut-scenes (which sadky lack the humor of the preivious two games), and then you find yourself running from a rival drive-by game by riding a bicycle.

Let's stop right there for a moment.

The whole thing that made GTA so beautiful was the open-ended nature of it. If you wanted to take the "obvious" path to complete a mission, you could, but it encouraged lateral thinking.

Classic example: In GTA-III, there's a mission where you are "supposed" to use a sniper rifle to assasinate a rival mob boss as he leaves his favorite restaurant. While there are a couple of vantage points from which you can pull this off, you can also steal a big vehicle (like a bus), go to HIS HOME, block the entry to his garage, and you lob grenades at his entire entourage while they try to pound their way through the driveway.

Back to San Andreas.

So, I'm on this mission where I gotta follow the other kids in my gang on a sad-looking bike, when I decide to say "screw this" and boost a car.

The moment I step off the bike, I can't continue the mission! The little nav guide I was following fanishes, and an urgent "GET BACK ON THE BIKE" message flashes on the screen. To use any means of transport, other than the crappy bike I stole, is forbidden.

Lame, lame, lame.

It's especially lame when you consider that riding little bicycles is BORING. They are slow to begin with, and waaaay slower when you try to take a hill. (Getting off the bike and walking it up is not an option, even though it would sometimes be faster.)

Then, if you want to be able to use these gay-ass bikes with any utility at all, or even if you want to run more than twenty paces or so without grabbing your knees and vomiting, you have to go to a gym and work out!

Who the hell thought it would be fun to play a weight-training simulator???

GTA used to be about being a clever, cold-blooded, hardened mafia goon who would joyride in hot cars and often had to McGuyver his way out of tight scrapes. That was the game I fell in love with.

GTA:SA is about being a mush-mouthed, scrawny, out-of-shape, dead-broke loser thug who needs to do hours of pilates just to pedal a sissy-bar bike up a resivior embankment. Put up with hours and hours of this crap, and you don't get to infiltrate the mob or yakuza or anything nearly that cool... no, you get gain cred with a bunch of california street hoodlums. Yay.

Their games are moving in the wrong direction. The game has become more rigid, less fun, and more reliant on cut-scenes to pad out a game with very little replay value. If this trend continues, their "franchise" will be worth less than that of Duke Nukem.

IMHO, YMMV, yadda yadda yadda

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14672743)

Put up with hours and hours of this crap, and you don't get to infiltrate the mob or yakuza or anything nearly that cool... no, you get gain cred with a bunch of california street hoodlums.


O RLY? Funny, last time I played, you do end up infiltrating the mob. Plus working with the Triads, some crazy hippy dude, and even a handful of missions for some mysterious CIA agent, etc.. All of which are a far cry from 'mush mouthed street hoodlums.' Either we played a different game, or you got bored and gave up before passing the first tenth or so of the game.

Or, you're just a troll.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672949)

Either we played a different game, or you got bored and gave up before passing the first tenth or so of the game.

The second one.

Which tells you everything you need to know about how boring that game is.

I finished the other two, and enjoyed every minute of it. With SA, I got tired of waiting for the fun to start after a few hours.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

XO (250276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675307)

in the first few missions on GTA3 and Vice City, you start out doing stupid stuff, too.

I didn't like how SA started out at all, because I'm more into the gangster rather than the gangsta.. but.. once i got through stealing rapper's rhymes for my fly friends, i started to enjoy the game a ton more. Except for flight school. Making the farking flight school mandatory would've had me quitting the game if I hadn't been able to download a saved game after that point. I was able to complete all the flying missions without being able to fly NEARLY as well as I had to just to pass one mission of the school.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

Zero_Independent (664974) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675381)

Yeah flight school was really hard. But look at it from another perspective. When was the last time you accomplished a goal in a video game that made you feel proud of your achievement afterwards instead of fading into obscurity with every other easy run and gun mission?

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

XO (250276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675719)

i had several times with SA, where I just put the game away for a day or two, and came back to it, because i was having such a hard time with some of the missions.. i didn't feel bad about skipping flight school one bit, i tried it like 6 times a day for a week, and then went and dl'd a save game .. doh.

  now that i'm running thru GTA3 (this time I'll finish it.. some day) i kinda wanna go back through vice, too, and see if i can do Vice without cheating.. though i think the endgame in vice would be completely impossible, since i was armed to the freaking teeth and had to type in the health cheat like 98 times..

  i still haven't finished the last damn mission on SA, chasing down the firetruck is about impossible :D

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

Schitzoflink (949390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676248)

How is it that people are angry that they can't run through a game without challenges...thats why games are starting to be crap now...no challenges...and GTA: SA...is still Ridiculous in how easy it is...the worst thing I had to worry about was my crappy 1st gen Xbox locking up. Now I have one of the ones that actually works and its fine...the flying is kinda disorienting at first...but its like any other game where you have to learn how to handle the vehicles...bah...if it was too easy you would be complaining about that.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

kisrael (134664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676330)

Now there's a question...what the hell was CJ's motivation for helping out that dork who needed the rhymes? Everyone knew he was a posing idiot, but CJ does his bidding like the other guy had dirty pictures of him.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

Schitzoflink (949390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676418)

I think it was pity, helping out the dork from his past who was trying real hard to fit in with the real gangstas, but just couldn't cut it.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

kisrael (134664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676446)

Hmm. I guess that's a pretty ok "in game" reason, though obviously it's more about later GTAs making you take missions that are assigned on you to advance the storyline...but still, the dork was so abusive, and they so played up how terrible he was, and the missions were so tough, relatively speaking...eh, whatevah. Still a great game.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

joshsisk (161347) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673046)

I agree they should have started your base strength/endurance level out higher, but the weight room aspect was fun in that if you did it, you got fun perks: you can pretty easily (maybe 30 minutes total of weight training, spread over a week) build yourself up to kill people with one hit with a blunt instrument, jump over cars with the bicycle, and pedal faster than many cars.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

Schitzoflink (949390) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676510)

And with the ammount of games that most of us have played I would think that tapping a button as fast as you can or alternating buttons would be easy..I personally just switch over to TV for the Min or two that it takes to "Max out" your workout for that day...

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (2, Insightful)

wheany (460585) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673254)

Some pros and cons of GTA:SA:

+ Bigger
+ CJ could swim and climb over walls. (and parachute) Swimming stopped boats from being deathtraps. Knee-high hedges no longer stopped you from running away when getting your ass kicked.
+ FPS style aiming (combined with auto aim). You could move while being ready to shoot at any moment.

- Working out and eating. Nice idea to be able to customise your character, but was there any advantage to being morbidly obese or really scrawny? I just went to the gym for a few days to max out CJ's muscle mass. Running and eating a salad every few days did the rest.
- No roads were even close to being somewhat straight routes from one city to the next. You always had to drive these serpentine roads or just drive off a cliff and hope you land on your wheels.
- Missions with stupid car usage limitations. Yeah, it's not realistic to drive 120 mph for two blocks in your brother's car, roll it and just steal another car, but this is GTA! Come on, cars are extremely expendable! If you want to have those kinds of limitations, make it easy to drive at "normal speed."
- Okay, so you can get some gang members to follow you, but as soon as you do, there are no more rival gang members anywhere. It's way easier to get gang wars when going solo.
- Camera is still pretty shitty in tight spots on foot.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (2, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673554)

"Put up with hours and hours of this crap, and you don't get to infiltrate the mob or yakuza or anything nearly that cool... no, you get gain cred with a bunch of california street hoodlums. Yay."

Wow. To those who played San Andreas more than an hour, here's how this post sounds:
"Star Wars is just a stupid movie about a couple of droids walking in the desert. Sand, hot weather, bitching about needing an oil bath. What a stupid ass scifi movie. It didn't even have spaceships!"

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675355)

Actually, it had two space ships before you get to the droids in the sand. Three, if you count the escape pod.

Oh, and the scene with the droids in the desert was ENTERTAINING, unlike the horse-shit opening to GTA:SA

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

Ced_Ex (789138) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672999)

GTASA was a good game, but I'm not sure really how much further they can go with the same idea over and over. It's not enough to have better graphics and stuff, they need to evolve the gameplay, and not just in minor tweaks.

Well, given processing power, and future media with larger storage, it has plenty more iterations left.

We could have full sized real cities, perhaps even a country where you can explore. This could include buildings, tunnels, subways, sewers, etc.

That alone without any additional gameplay features would be enough to get gamers coming back.

I'm sure there are plenty other suggestions that could be added to this, but it's a start.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

XO (250276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675322)

well, we had an entire state to cover with SA, and unless they get you an airport where you can just board a plane and be at your destination in a real life minute or so, I don't think I want to play an entire country in this scale :D

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

h3llfish (663057) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673701)

I'm not sure really how much further they can go with the same idea over and over.

I guess it's fair to say that the PSP version amounts to watering down, because it was sort of a "lite" version. But I don't think anyone was expecting them to beat their old games on a portable device. That's really an apples and oranges comparison. The innovation is clearly going to come on the new generation of home consoles, or on PCs.

And the ways that they can expand the franchise are pretty obvious. Some of them amount to expansions of features they already have, and a couple of new directions are pretty obvious.

As new consoles become available, the whole game world gets bigger. Maps are larger, there can be more cars, more missions, and more complex interaction with NPCs. If that isn't exciting to you, then you didn't like GTA in the first place.

That goes for your character as well as the game world. They just started to add RPG elements in SA, and that can all be expanded. More skills to upgrade, more gear to use, more outfits to wear. Maybe in the new versions, you don't always have to be the same character as everyone else, but instead get to make a really unique character.

And you'll need a unique character to distinguish yourself from other people when you play online someday. I think the really exciting direction that GTA is sure to go eventually is to allow you to play with groups of people. A massive persistent world done in the GTA style is one thing that would tear me away from Worlds of Warcraft. Maybe the idea of millions of gamers paying 15 bucks a month would be enough to get them to make a PC only GTA game. Or maybe they could make it work for people on consoles too.

So I think you're a bit early in pronouncing the franchise played out. They've always done a great job of pushing console hardware to it's limits, and as the hardware improves, those limits will expand.

Re:I think GTA is getting watered down (1)

kisrael (134664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676347)

I for one don't WANT to be a unique character.

I hate managing my character like a damn dressup doll. Just give me something fun to do, don't make me worry about how I look doing it, or if I've spent enough time in the gym...

Plus, to really pull that off, they'd likely need to go back to a silent main character...or else have a very limited set of voices.

I can see GTA evolving (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671708)

Into an online massive world, where you strive to be a gang leader / mafia leader / etc against other real players. Think GTA:SA Gang Wars, but with real people, real gangs, real gang members.

Yeah, gang == MMORPG guild, deal with it.

You could be a hick gang leader in the boonies. You could run a business pimping, or selling drugs/etc.

Of course, the car is the central point. Getting cars will be harder, none of this 'run up and get car' business. You'll need to learn how to do it. You'll start off on a bike, try to join a gang ... eventually get a car, you've got to look after it, or you'll lose it in an accident.

Oh, time to go home. Sod this post, time for pr0n and food.

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

Zardus (464755) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672087)

The problem with a game like that is the inevitable 12-year-old-running-a-brothel phoenomina like what happened in the Sims Online. Except for EA had a defense of "This wasn't supposed to happen!", whereas Rockstar will be pretty fucked and the resulting lawsuits and scandal will come barreling at them with great force.

Not that they're not used to that.

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672268)

12 year olds shouldn't be playing the damn game.

Certainly the next GTA game, online or not, will be very clearly labelled 18. The install will make this very clear too, and disclaim all liabilities for underage players playing the game. Maybe Take Two could make a campaign for parental responsibility at the launch as well, to draw off the inevitable 14 year old who shot someone in real life claiming that GTA did it.

On a side note, how can an unrated post be modded 'overrated'?

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

Zardus (464755) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673975)

Yeah, they shouldn't be playing the game. But somewhere, somehow, one of them will, and when the story breaks, no one's gonna say "Well, his parents should have done their job." Instead, its gonna be "OMG WTF Rockstar is teh evil and is corrupting our poor precious childrens' fragile minds!" and people like Jack Thompson will go on CNN talking about how the entire problem is caused solely by the game developers and we need to have laws requiring mandatory lobotomies for anyone in the gaming industry.

Really, the whole issue involves several different problems. One is rather similar to one of the arguments against the war on drugs and the drinking age: If you make something available only to the adults or forbit it outright, it'll spark the interest of those for whom it's forbidden. A friend of mine in elementary school was forbidden by his parents from playing Warcraft (because the corpses rotted after they were killed) so instead he became insanely obsessed with it and played it at my house. Other friends whose parents forbade certain games exibited similar behavior. Of course, this is anecdotal experience and might very well not happen outside of my experience, but as I see it, its a problem.

Another part of the problem as I see it stems from marketing. For example, my wife's little brother has an X-Box. He's 10, so there are very few games that he can play on it; most of the good games for the X-Box are aimed at the older gamers. As a result, he's stuck playing the small amount of games that are appropriate for him. The reason he has an X-Box is that it was the console with the marketing that reached his parents, so it was the one that they were most aware of. Over the summer, I let him borrow my Gamecube and brought him a new game almost every week that was both fun and appropriate for him. If his parents had researched game consoles before buying him one, though, he could have had a Gamecube from the start (and with the price difference between the consoles, they could have gotten him three or four more used games).

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672655)

Getting cars will be harder, none of this 'run up and get car' business. You'll need to learn how to do it. You'll start off on a bike, try to join a gang ... eventually get a car, you've got to look after it, or you'll lose it in an accident.

Screw that!

The main thing that made the GTA series fun is the "drive it like you stole it... because you did" recklessness of the whole thing. If swiping cars isn't every bit as easy as stealing apples from a neighbor's tree, then the game has no reason to exist anymore.

In order to truly make the game work as an MMO, everything would need to be more abundant. Design a city with a population of 100,000, only 2000 or so of which will be players (1000 cop/vigilante types, 1000 mobster/gangta types) and intance another city if you need to put more than 2000 players at once on a server.

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

grondak (80002) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673806)

If swiping cars isn't every bit as easy as stealing apples from a neighbor's tree, then the game has no reason to exist anymore.

The natural price of cars in GTA is zero: anything you can get for free, you will get for free.

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

XO (250276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675337)

I wouldn't mind it if, like they did in GTA3, the people fought for their cars a little bit more. In GTA3, if you ganked a Mafia Sentinel, even before the Mafia hated you, the guy would draw his gun and blast you a couple times before you got out of his range. Sometimes if you didn't get out of there fast enough, the original owner would take it back. And the funniest thing, I was sitting on a timed mission in GTA3, waiting for something or other to happen, and a normal citizen just walked up to my Sentinel, and stole it from me! i was amazed. Never saw any of that in VC or SA, which I played first

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

badasscat (563442) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672934)

Into an online massive world, where you strive to be a gang leader / mafia leader / etc against other real players. Think GTA:SA Gang Wars, but with real people, real gangs, real gang members.

The problem is Rockstar North have basically no experience making MMO's, and very limited experience making online games at all (Wild Metal being one exception - even GTA:LCS was ported by Rockstar Leeds). They have steadfastly resisted adding any real online modes to the GTA series, claiming each time that they can't figure out a way to make it work. LCS showed they could do it in a very limited way, but designing an MMO game is a whole different animal... because you're not tacking on an online mode to an already existing game, you're trying to build an entire self-sustaining world around the online component. It's completely the reverse in terms of the way you traditionally design a game.

They're going to need to do something to shake up the formula, so I'm not suggesting this won't happen. What I am suggesting is that it's no guaranteed recipe for success. They'd have to create their own MMO template - copying other games just won't do for GTA, and in any case even if they did, there's not much about a game like Final Fantasy XI that I think you could translate into a GTA world. So they'd be going into uncharted territory with no experience, and given their past statements on the matter I don't think even they're convinced they could pull it off.

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

payndz (589033) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673311)

Into an online massive world, where you strive to be a gang leader / mafia leader / etc against other real players. Think GTA:SA Gang Wars, but with real people, real gangs, real gang members.

Yeah, gang == MMORPG guild, deal with it.

You could be a hick gang leader in the boonies. You could run a business pimping, or selling drugs/etc.

Of course, the car is the central point. Getting cars will be harder, none of this 'run up and get car' business. You'll need to learn how to do it. You'll start off on a bike, try to join a gang ... eventually get a car, you've got to look after it, or you'll lose it in an accident.

Oh god, no! Even the minimal RPG elements in San Andreas got annoying. You're just cruising around, having fun, side-slipping a helicopter along San Fiero beach and scything down sunbathers with the rotor blades... then the 'You are feeling hungry' message pops up. Great, now I need to break off from the carnage to find food. I have to do that in real life, thanks - I don't need it in a game! What's next, if you don't sleep for eight hours of every 24 in game time you start hallucinating then pass out?

And the idea of GTA featuring Grinding(TM) before I can even drive a damn car would be a surefire way of deterring me from ever playing it. Grinding and boss battles... two things that modern games way over-use.

Re:I can see GTA evolving (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673394)

Okay, it's a crap idea!

Next GTA game? (1)

pbaumgar (595159) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671739)

Anyone know when/if a new GTA game is coming out and what it will be about?

Re:Next GTA game? (1)

tont0r (868535) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671782)

Re:Next GTA game? (1)

PhilippeT (697931) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671878)

I don't know about it being in just London? London is about the same size as LA and SA had LA, SF and Vagas in it.

Re:Next GTA game? (1)

oneils (934770) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672890)

Those cities weren't built to scale though. They just placed it in three different settings like that for variety. If they try to build London to scale, say on a grander scale than the getaway, then there will be plenty of variety for everyone. You just have to see SF, Vegas, and LA as neighbourhoods of GTA:SA. If London will be the new setting, there will be plenty of neighbourhoods and variety to keep you interested.

Re:Next GTA game? (4, Funny)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671830)

The next game should be "GTA: Minding your own business".

Instead of starting off as a smalltime thug trying to make it big, you're an upper-middle class guy driving home from work to his nice house, wife, dog, and 2.5 kids when suddenly some smalltime thug yanks you out of your Lexus at a stoplight and speeds off. You aren't going to take this lying down, are you? After all, you're 40, underappreciated, and the guy in the next cubicle over keeps smacking his gum all day long. You're overdue for your midlife crisis, and it's time to snap.

You're going to take on that gang single handedly. Your PDA's got a lock on the lojack signal, and no smalltime thug is a match for your fearsome arsenal of staplers, tps reports, and the powerful LAW(yer) rocket. You're getting that car back, if it's the last thing you do.

Besides, you've still got $15k of payments to go on that baby.

GTA: Falling Down (4, Funny)

djdavetrouble (442175) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672060)

I love that Idea, sounds vaguely like that terrible movie, Falling Down. I'm thinking GTA: Bangalore, where you can outsource your jackings for like 1/4 the price of a domestic jacking.

Screw you, hippie, Falling Down rocks [nt] (1)

James A. V. Joyce (798462) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675621)

nt

Re:Screw you, hippie, Falling Down rocks [nt] (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14675728)

Negative one my balls, this idiot has no taste - Falling down is a fine fucking movie - good lord some people have no taste.

How about GTA:DNF? (1)

master_p (608214) | more than 8 years ago | (#14676168)

Where Duke is unleashed into Los Angeles, trying to find the evil alien crime gangs, and at the same time find out who is responsible for the Phantom Console that caused a spacetime rift and let all these aliens in...

Re:Next GTA game? (1)

Deanasc (201050) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672241)

I don't see why this is a bad idea. Afterall, I already know Liberty City more intimately then I do the real city I live in. It would be a fresh way to revisit the cities of the earlier games. Plus they could be more challenging to take advantage of the regular players familiarity with the maps. Somebody just jacked my car. Dammit. I'm calling the police. Then when the corrupt police file the report and forget it the player calls his 'cousin' who puts him in touch with Joey at the chop shop. Something could happen and it looks like Joey was killed by the player. Then the player has to try to clear his name with the mafia bosses. Or some citizen comes in with a carjacking report and offers a bribe to a corrupt cop who tries to find the car and at the same time dodge an internal affairs investigation for his role in a gangland shootout. There's no end to the possibilities.

Re:Next GTA game? (2, Funny)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672688)

Ooo... I smell a cross-license deal!

"Grand Theft Auto: Falling Down." [imdb.com]

Re:Next GTA game? (1)

clackerd (797052) | more than 8 years ago | (#14674763)

word up to that, i've always wanted a sequel to harry the handsome executive!
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/games/harry/ [ambrosiasw.com]

As much as I loved GTA3 (5, Interesting)

guspasho (941623) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671758)

I couldn't bring myself to spend the time to finish Vice City, or get more than a few hours into San Andreas. They didn't seem like anything new, just more.

Re:As much as I loved GTA3 (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14671845)

I couldn't bring myself to spend the time to finish super Mario Brothers 2, or get more than a few hours into super Mario Brothers 3. They didn't seem like anything new, just more.

Re:As much as I loved GTA3 (1)

Ced_Ex (789138) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673120)

What about Doom 3?

Re:As much as I loved GTA3 (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671868)

I couldn't bring myself to spend the time to finish Vice City, or get more than a few hours into San Andreas. They didn't seem like anything new, just more.

In related news... "Sequel Fatigue cause of slow sales?" [slashdot.org]

Re:As much as I loved GTA3 (1)

drewzhrodague (606182) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671950)

Same here. This is what drives me to play Dance Dance Revolution, We Love Katamari, and take-up an interest in some of the other odd games out there. Multiplayer GTA would be fab, though I wouldn't pay to play.

Re:As much as I loved GTA3 (1)

Corbu Mulak (931063) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671985)

I found GTA3 to be fun for about 2 hours, then I got really bored by it. Vice City was better, but I never finished that one either. San Andreas is the only game where I felt the missions were varied enough and the characters were unique enough for me to want to finish the game.

Franchises are OK (5, Insightful)

The-Bus (138060) | more than 8 years ago | (#14671871)

"While it's hard to blame Take-Two for its reliance on a blockbuster franchise, eventually gamers are likely to tire of the GTA formula, or the games will no longer feel fresh when placed side-by-side with titles that perhaps improve on that formula."


Well, iD seems to be barrelling along just fine on the strength of the same game. Epic is doing Gears of War but that's probably the first non-Unreal game to come out of them in the past 8 years. (To be fair, both of these companies, to my knowledge, derive or derived income by licensing their game engine).

McDonald's seems to be doing OK only selling hamburgers.

Take Two's reliance on a blockbuster franchise is only bad if having one bad game can crumble their company. If they can publish a GTA game that sells only "OK" (say, 1 million copies) and still run the business profitably, then they're fine. Otherwise, they're a bloated company with few cash reserves. GTA is not the problem in that case.

Re:Franchises are OK (2, Funny)

Madpony (935423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672127)

McDonald's seems to be doing OK only selling hamburgers


There's a big difference between selling a hamburger and selling a piece of entertainment media. People are more willing to come back to get the same thing to eat than they are willing to play the same kind of game that eats up hours of their free time.

First of all, we need to eat, we don't need to play GTA.

Second, eating at McDonald's is a lot less of a time sink :)

Re:Franchises are OK (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672398)

Second, eating at McDonald's is a lot less of a time sink :)

No, you'll just be subtracting that lost time from your life all at once instead of in little pieces...

Re:Franchises are OK (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675539)

No, you'll just be subtracting that lost time from your life all at once instead of in little pieces...

Who cares? It all comes off the end!

Franchises are OK to a point (4, Insightful)

wandazulu (265281) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672233)

...which is what I think they were getting at. I bought every id game from wolfenstein3d to ...wolfenstein redux. I did not buy doom 3 nor quake 4 and have no desire to do so; I'm just not interested in either one anymore. Walk, get spooked, shoot, repeat. Graphics look awesome but it seems to me just a rehash of the games I played in the early 90s.

Same thing with GTA...GTA 3 was fun, Vice City was *really* fun, SA was neither here nor there for me. Besides, where can they go with it?

I went nuts with Unreal Tournament, even designing some levels, but UT3 and 4 didn't impress (why they take away the *best* weapon in the game (snipers rifle) is beyond me). I still play the original UT because it "felt right". Years after the fact and I'm still haunting the halls of CTF-November.

The only franchises that I've seen work over time are the "story"-type ones of Zelda, Final Fantasy, and the like. If Doom had a story (I mean a *real* story, a la Half-Life) I might be interested to see "what happens next", but they didn't do that.

Sadly, the one true franchise that relies on a continuous story, Shenmue, doesn't seem like it'll see the light of day.

People will come back for more if there's a reason to come back for more. In the age of OpenGL-based desktops, dual core processors, gigabytes of ram, SLI video cards, etc. etc., graphics are no longer the "more" and any franchise that doesn't see that is doomed.

Re:Franchises are OK to a point (1)

steveo777 (183629) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672471)

Same thing with GTA...GTA 3 was fun, Vice City was *really* fun, SA was neither here nor there for me. Besides, where can they go with it?

I agree with you, mostly. I thought all the GTA's for PS2 were pretty fun in their own rights. (I didn't really like Vice City as much as the other two because the land was so flat and streets seemed a lot more cramped). All in all, though, they were the same game with a change of scenery. What I liked about San Andreas was exploring the countryside, and finding the jumps (and the Harrier is a lot of fun).

I never bought any of the GTA series games because I don't care if another one is ever made. I play the game at my friends' houses. I'd say they can probably refine their formula two, perhaps three times at max before this well is completely dry. I'm sure that anyone can plainly see that even if they re-release one of these with all new graphics, textures, and charecter models people will buy the game in droves. No need to tighten up gameplay or add real elements. People do buy graphics, but they will catch on after that.

Re:Franchises are OK to a point (1)

JofCoRe (315438) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672796)

..which is what I think they were getting at. I bought every id game from wolfenstein3d to ...wolfenstein redux. I did not buy doom 3 nor quake 4 and have no desire to do so; I'm just not interested in either one anymore. Walk, get spooked, shoot, repeat. Graphics look awesome but it seems to me just a rehash of the games I played in the early 90s.

Gotta disagree on this point... For me, having played the original Doom and Doom2 back when they originally came out made Doom 3 even more enjoyable for me. For me, it was like revisiting the games I loved from back then, but now they were done how they were originally intended to be. I mean, the original Doom made me jump a couple times (like the first time one of those pink things jumped out of the dark and bit me :)), but back then I was younger and I don't think playing Doom again would make me jump now. But believe me, when I was playing Doom 3 through for the first time on my xbox w/surround sound in a dark room, there were numerous places that it made me jump, 20 years later :)

Sure, the Doom story was never that great, but at least in Doom 3 they at least tried to have a story of some sort... I dunno, guess it was nostalgia and memory of playing the originals that made me enjoy Doom 3 so much. It was nice to see the game that I played as a youth revitalized with today's tech..

Re:Franchises are OK to a point (1)

Bongo Bill (853669) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673344)

Most of iD's games are, in fact, intended to be merely tech demos for the engine, which they license to other developers as their primary source of income. A number of other developers follow this model as well. That the tech demos usually tend to be good enough (if not always original enough) to stand on their own right as commercial games is more of a fringe benefit.

Re:Franchises are OK (1)

xenn (148389) | more than 8 years ago | (#14674339)

McDonald's seems to be doing OK only selling hamburgers.

No. They now sell alot more than just hamburgers. Remember a few years ago they were losing huge amounts of their profits and growth (probably around the time Upsize Me was released). Then they came up with the profound idea of giving people a healthier alternative, ala McSalad and McPiece of Fruit or whatever they call their new menus.

people do get bored, but often they are slow to realise they're bored. It will happen eventually to GTA.

Re:Franchises are OK (1)

UnixRevolution (597440) | more than 8 years ago | (#14677072)

McDonald's seems to be doing OK only selling hamburgers.

In the Fifties Mcdonalds did ok selling only hamburgers. And fries. And Shakes.

Now they sell burgers, burritos, sausage sandwiches, pancakes, chicken nuggets, chicken sandwiches, chicken strips, steak & cheese, salads, yogurt parfaits, ice cream, milkshakes, sundaes, cones, pie....

true dat (1)

panic911 (224370) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672236)

This is true, but I kind of thought the same thing after GTA 2. I figured since GTA 1 and 2 were already so controversial they would never be able to top themselves and if they did, they wouldn't be able to use good graphics to do it. I was proven wrong when GTA3 came out. At first I wasn't too accepting of the new GTA series, but after playing it for a while I loved it! GTA:SA goes down in my book for the best game ever. But it is definitely time for a major revamp of their engine - particularly the way it renders stuff and the poly count. I'm sure they won't cease to amaze on their next creation.

Opposite Problem... Not enough of games... (2, Insightful)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672418)

Games just aren't long enough, don't have enough content, or are too short between the sequals.

When I play a game, I have to develop a whole new skill set. Each game has it's own physics, rules, key-configurations, etc. ... Once I spend the time developing a basic proficiency in a game, I want to enjoy as much content in that game world as possible.

Most of the games I enjoy, I could play them for years without getting bored, so long as someone kept developing new content. My favorite games are GTA series, or Morrowind, or games with big open worlds and lots of content. But if a FPS had a subscription services where I could purchase new levels each week (and especially if it was all part of some continuing story), it would take an extremly long time to get bored.

And I think a lot of people agree with me. Look at MMPOGs... people like them because of the human interaction of course... but people also like them because the game content never runs out (once you complete the quests, you can play meta-games such as guild politics, trading for profit, and there will also be expansions coming along)

MMPOG: Slashdot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14672895)

"And I think a lot of people agree with me. Look at MMPOGs... people like them because of the human interaction of course... but people also like them because the game content never runs out (once you complete the quests, you can play meta-games such as guild politics, trading for profit, and there will also be expansions coming along)"

Well that certainly explains the success of Slashdot.

Re:Opposite Problem... Not enough of games... (1)

Jearil (154455) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672943)

I agree with the FPS in an MMO like way.. The only game I've played like that was PlanetSide, which was damn fun. However, I wish there was a Planetside 2 with updated graphics and maybe a bit more in the way of obectives and goals.

Re:Opposite Problem... Not enough of games... (1)

Verminator (559609) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673187)

Here here.
MechWarrior II.
More expansion packs needed.

Tire of GTA... (1, Funny)

rAiNsT0rm (877553) | more than 8 years ago | (#14672632)

"eventually gamers are likely to tire of the GTA formula, or the games will no longer feel fresh"

Umm, so the, carjack, drive, shoot/hit, smack ho formula could get old and tired?!? *gasp* no, really?!?

For cripes sake GTA has been old and tired for some time to everyone but pre-pubescent boys who aren't really worried about much more than guns, boobies, and "flogging the bishop"... well, I guess that describes most of /. too... but I digress.

reaction to a repressive society (1)

docidu (885797) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673863)

I think that as long as we live in a repressed society and form of entertainment that allows the opressed to strike back at the opressors will sell quite well, be it roasting pigs with a flamethrower, or dropping corrupt politicians with a sniper rifle.... games like GTA will lose popularity as soon as our government and society quit repressing our base urges to use drugs, engage in prostitution, and such through laws.... vice is not a crime, it is an affront to the basic concepts of freedom, and in a apathetic socity where people are afraid or too lazy to stand up, simulations of such things will remain popular....just look at how many idiots get all worked up over a stupid football game, but barely blink an eye when an abominitaion like the patriot act is passed destroying any vestages of freedom we had outside of the ability to rant to each other about it...and im sure that will be incrementally eroded as well in the coming years.... so, mabey the whole idea of distractions such as GTA, organised sports and such is a bad idea as it provides for a release of these tensions and delays the revolution....

Repressive Society??? (0, Offtopic)

fujiman (912957) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675575)

Please. Get a passport. Travel a little. Visit some other countries that scare you a little and then talk about "repressive societies".

If the patriot act is the best example of an "abomination" you can think of, you certainly haven't seen much of the world.

Yes, I believe in a free society where everyone can speak out against whatever ails them. But the parent post just reeks of teen angst and an intellect that has never ventured far beyond home, or the recycled rants of Green Day on MTV.

MMOGTA (1)

serial_crusher (591271) | more than 8 years ago | (#14673925)

When are we going to see MMOGTA? It would be an awesome idea and would probably generate a lot of extra revenue, given the general addictiveness of other MMOGs.

better games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14674265)

the games will no longer feel fresh when placed side-by-side with titles that perhaps improve on that formula.

such titles so far:

end of list.

Re:better games (1)

XO (250276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675358)

got that right. I've played at least one or two that tried to improve, and failed miserably. Maximum Overdose really had a good start to it, and then it slacked off QUICKLY. VERY QUICKLY.

  After about 30-45 minutes, I ended up not really even wanting to finish it.

  Gun also could've been much better, but I actually finished that on the same day I got it. Note to devs: if a guy can finish your game the same day he gets it, particularly even when taking breaks from it, you've either got (a) a fantastic concept (b) a paid tester.. and you've definitely got (c) way too little content.

Is anyone else sick of 1 player games? (1)

Anyd (625939) | more than 8 years ago | (#14675376)

I don't know about you guys, but since the early Ultima Online days, I havn't been able to play a single player game all the way through. I just get sick of puzzles that seem artificially hard/annoying. Nothing, in my book, stands up to the challenge of facing other people.

GTA Online could be fun though. "Only 3 more dead hookers and I can level up!"

Am I the only one who still likes GTA? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14676162)

I didn't think I'd ever hafta defend GTA on slashdot, but from the responses it seems like more people are dumping on the game than supporting it. Or maybe there's just some vicious moderators out there :P

At any rate, Vice City was a huge improvement on GTA3 - the way you could purchase property and generate income. Money actually meant something in this game and so mugging someone on the street or holding up the pizza joint actually helped you to progress through. As per usual, the story was well-scripted and well-acted, which is more than I can say for 90% of the other mainstream games that are released. And maybe it's just cuz I like mafia movies, but it felt really cool to start out as a 'thug' and work your way up to becoming this mafia boss overlord. Damn, I might hafta play through vice city again :P

San Andreas took it to the next level by making the map like 3x larger than Vice City. They also added turf wars and (best of all) stats for your character. Now it was hardly an RPG, but you still improved as you played the game - your fitness level and firing accuracy and driving ability all increased with more experience. They also introduced girlfriends, which despite the hot coffee scandal, were a neat addition to the game - just another facet you could spend time on if you wanted to complete the entire thing. Again, it was well written and well performed, which again, if you've played any other mainstream releases, you'll know is a rarity unto itself.

So I dunno, maybe it's my latent criminal tendencies, but I love the GTA series...I have since the very first one. As long as they continue to improve it at the rate they're going, I'd happily play another dozen. I agree that if it had stayed at the quality level of GTA3 I probably would have tired long ago, but they've gone leaps and bounds between 3 and SA. For those who say they couldn't play more than 15 minutes of Vice City or San Andreas because it was 'more of the same,' I gotta say that you didn't really give it a chance to get into the story. Of course the first few missions are always the same, it's the way you introduce new players into the GTA world.

Different strokes I guess, but I'll gladly play some more GTA...might even get a PSP just for Liberty City stories when I start to see used ones for sale.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?