[DynamicInABox]

JESUS CHRIST! I CAN'T GO 1 PAGE WITHOUT THIS f*ckING STUPID THREAD POPING UP!
ITS LOS SANTOS AND THE SURROUNDING HILLS, COUNTRYSIDE AND BEACHES.

GET THIS INTO YOUR HEADS!

[SmoothGTA]

QUOTE (cherrycola @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 17:28)

^ But why would they choose to answer that question if they were just gonna repeat the press release and that's that? They didn't have to answer it. Either it's confirmed that SF and LV is not in the game, or Rockstar is intentionally misleading us. Take your pick.

This right here is the type of logic fail that is causing all these stupid arguments. Why does it have to be one or the other, friend? This is exactly how inexperienced Poker players get caught off guard when they misread the odds on the flop, 4th street or the river.

It's R*. They are vague about a lot of things, in and out of their games. I'd love it for LV and SF to be in the game but I've seen no evidence to support this yet. Therefore I'm sticking to the camp that understands the subtleties of English and is leaving the possibilities open for whatever.

Anyone who is dogmatic about what is in the game (at this point) is most likely wrong about whatever they assert.

[cherrycola]

QUOTE (SmoothGTA @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 20:23)

QUOTE (cherrycola @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 17:28) ^ But why would they choose to answer that question if they were just gonna repeat the press release and that's that? They didn't have to answer it. Either it's confirmed that SF and LV is not in the game, or Rockstar is intentionally misleading us. Take your pick. This right here is the type of logic fail that is causing all these stupid arguments. Why does it have to be one or the other, friend? This is exactly how inexperienced Poker players get caught off guard when they misread the odds on the flop, 4th street or the river. It's R*. They are vague about a lot of things, in and out of their games. I'd love it for LV and SF to be in the game but I've seen no evidence to support this yet. Therefore I'm sticking to the camp that understands the subtleties of English and is leaving the possibilities open for whatever. Anyone who is dogmatic about what is in the game (at this point) is most likely wrong about whatever they assert.

No, the arguments are started by those who claim that SF and LV will be in the game, or I would have no reason to counter the claim.

They didn't have to bring it up, they could've ignored the question, but they chose to answer it. And in their reply they added nothing more than what was already stated in the announcement. I believe the people who work at Rockstar are professional enough that this was not a mistake, thus it was either an attempt at misleading us, or it was a way of saying that the cities requested will not feature in GTA V.

I'm not dogmatic about what is in the game, but I am dogmatic about them misleading us if it turns out that the cities will be in the game after all. That's not opinion, that's fact.

[FelipeVinhao]

This thing about interpretation around here is getting me sick. I'm not part of any of the purists here, so the only thing I'm sure based on our only current sources (trailer, announcement, Q&A) is that Los Santos and countryside will be there.

You're all starting to interpret this only piece of information as some Brazilians interpret the laws (Brazilian here, so please don't get offended). Killing someone is against the law, but there's nothing specified about about killing someone sticking a table leg on one's liver at midnight, so killing someone with a table leg at midnight isn't against the law.

[SmoothGTA]

QUOTE (cherrycola @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 18:34)

QUOTE (SmoothGTA @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 20:23) QUOTE (cherrycola @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 17:28) ^ But why would they choose to answer that question if they were just gonna repeat the press release and that's that? They didn't have to answer it. Either it's confirmed that SF and LV is not in the game, or Rockstar is intentionally misleading us. Take your pick. This right here is the type of logic fail that is causing all these stupid arguments. Why does it have to be one or the other, friend? This is exactly how inexperienced Poker players get caught off guard when they misread the odds on the flop, 4th street or the river. It's R*. They are vague about a lot of things, in and out of their games. I'd love it for LV and SF to be in the game but I've seen no evidence to support this yet. Therefore I'm sticking to the camp that understands the subtleties of English and is leaving the possibilities open for whatever. Anyone who is dogmatic about what is in the game (at this point) is most likely wrong about whatever they assert. No, the arguments are started by those who claim that SF and LV will be in the game, or I would have no reason to counter the claim. They didn't have to bring it up, they could've ignored the question, but they chose to answer it. And in their reply they added nothing more than what was already stated in the announcement. I believe the people who work at Rockstar are professional enough that this was not a mistake, thus it was either an attempt at misleading us, or it was a way of saying that the cities requested will not feature in GTA V. I'm not dogmatic about what is in the game, but I am dogmatic about them misleading us if it turns out that the cities will be in the game after all. That's not opinion, that's fact.

I understand, I just don't like "either-or" logic as it usually only focuses on two of the most OBVIOUS outcomes to the detriment of others.

You seem to have failed to consider the possibility that they answered the question to reignite the discussion. Yes ignoring the question would have been clearer, yes they restated the press release and YES we are still talking about it. That doesn't mean no other options are on the table.

I'm also not entirely sure that it's up to anyone to "counter" anything that people speculate on because we only have the official announcement and its VAGUE. There isn't enough info in the trailer to counter anything except the most obvious. For example I haven't heard anyone claim that Los Santos IS NOT in the game.

[SmoothGTA]

QUOTE (FelipeVinhao @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 18:36)

This thing about interpretation around here is getting me sick. I'm not part of any of the purists here, so the only thing I'm sure based on our only current sources (trailer, announcement, Q&A) is that Los Santos and countryside will be there. You're all starting to interpret this only piece of information as some Brazilians interpret the laws (Brazilian here, so please don't get offended). Killing someone is against the law, but there's nothing specified about about killing someone sticking a table leg on one's liver at midnight, so killing someone with a table leg at midnight isn't against the law.

I understand what you are saying but I think the comparison you are using is faulty. I don't think this is a case of childlike logic where because something WASN'T explicitly stated, there is no harm done. I think it has more to do with a lot of people's reading comprehension levels, whether or not English is their native language, and understanding the subtleties of how adults talk in the real world.

Too many people are so willing to take it at face value when, as R* fans, they should know better.

[FelipeVinhao]

QUOTE (SmoothGTA @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 16:57)

I think it has more to do with a lot of people's reading comprehension levels, whether or not English is their native language, and understanding the subtleties of how adults talk in the real world.

Actually my comparision was more about "it isn't written anywhere it won't be". I know, my comparision may be a little ambiguous, so I got your point.

One example of this is the one I mentioned some posts ago - people were so blind about this that even Vice City was a possibility. Really, we can have any excuse ("it's a fictional place", "it's not written anywhere it won't be"...), but Vice City is a bit too far to be only compreension issue.

[Vercetti27]

QUOTE (DynamicInABox @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 18:22)

JESUS CHRIST! I CAN'T GO 1 PAGE WITHOUT THIS f*ckING STUPID THREAD POPING UP! ITS LOS SANTOS AND THE SURROUNDING HILLS, COUNTRYSIDE AND BEACHES. GET THIS INTO YOUR HEADS!

no thur wil B vIce city andliberty 2 plus you get arkham city atually my bro workds 4 rOckstar

[cherrycola]

QUOTE (SmoothGTA @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 20:50)

I understand, I just don't like "either-or" logic as it usually only focuses on two of the most OBVIOUS outcomes to the detriment of others. You seem to have failed to consider the possibility that they answered the question to reignite the discussion. Yes ignoring the question would have been clearer, yes they restated the press release and YES we are still talking about it. That doesn't mean no other options are on the table. I'm also not entirely sure that it's up to anyone to "counter" anything that people speculate on because we only have the official announcement and its VAGUE. There isn't enough info in the trailer to counter anything except the most obvious. For example I haven't heard anyone claim that Los Santos IS NOT in the game.

It was specific enough to downright exclude northern California's San Fierro, and strongly hint to no LV. If they wanted us to discuss this matter they would have made it vague enough to include MORE of the west coast, not less.

[zzcool]

i guess we'll get all this answered in the next questions which will be in maybe 2 months

[rodneythesavior]

Why can't this topic die?
Let's say I told you that I liked 'HEROES' and some other super-hero shows.

If you were to ask "Do you like Smallville and the Green Lantern?"
And I answered "I mostly like 'Heroes' but there are other shows that I watch"

I would be being purposefully vague, You didn't get your answer, but I reiterated what I originally said. You can't be 100% sure of it either way, so stop guessing guys. We will know when Rockstar hands out solid info.

[I personally do not think that SF/LV are in the game, but it's the principle of the whole situation]

[SmoothGTA]

QUOTE (cherrycola @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 20:27)

It was specific enough to downright exclude northern California's San Fierro, and strongly hint to no LV. If they wanted us to discuss this matter they would have made it vague enough to include MORE of the west coast, not less.

I get it dude, but your point gets rendered moot by the use of the word "reimagined" in the press release. Again I'm not making an argument for SF/LV just pointing out that its not wise to be so sure of ANYTHING at this point.

It just seems really weird to take a company that prides itself on secrecy, at face value. Not saying this is you, just the majority of "JESUS CAN"T YOU PEOPLE READ? ITS LOS SANTOS!!!! ONLY LOS SANTOS AND c*ntRYSIDE!!!!111" people.

[Death2Drugs]

QUOTE (SmoothGTA @ Wednesday, Feb 22 2012, 20:52)

QUOTE (cherrycola @ Monday, Feb 20 2012, 20:27) It was specific enough to downright exclude northern California's San Fierro, and strongly hint to no LV. If they wanted us to discuss this matter they would have made it vague enough to include MORE of the west coast, not less. I get it dude, but your point gets rendered moot by the use of the word "reimagined" in the press release. Again I'm not making an argument for SF/LV just pointing out that its not wise to be so sure of ANYTHING at this point. It just seems really weird to take a company that prides itself on secrecy, at face value. Not saying this is you, just the majority of "JESUS CAN"T YOU PEOPLE READ? ITS LOS SANTOS!!!! ONLY LOS SANTOS AND c*ntRYSIDE!!!!111" people.

Finally. Someone with god damn common sense.

At this point, we CANNOT assume what will and will not be in the game. It doesn't seem like LV and SF are returning, but they are still a possibility. Just keep an open mind people.