Ze Fire of da City Group: Members
Joined: Sep 17, 2009
QUOTE (Tipper @ Saturday, Apr 14 2012, 15:10)
Liberty City in III was only partially made up. The park in the middle of the central island, the skyscrapers, cold and rainy weather , the overall east coast feel. It still felt like NY.
This I agree. I felt GTA 3 had more of that gloomy, cold, helplessly dangerous vibe NY had. It felt perfectly with the whole "worst place in America" vibe.
This I felt was not there in GTA IV's rendition, as if R* attempted to make the place more "happy". Rain was far less frequent, and the city felt "orange" rather than "grey", something that would better fit LS/LA than NY.
Even the soundtrack didn't help establish the vibe, as there were too many different stations with no similarities between them. Here's a track from GTA 3, created by Craig Connor who works for R*, and the track was created specifically for GTA 3. It conveyed that gloomy melancholy perfectly:
This post has been edited by urbanfire on Sunday, Apr 15 2012, 03:49
I thought GTAIV was very blue. Blue and grey was what I got from it. Even when it was a sunny day out, it had this dread atmosphere that no matter how much light you shine on this place, it's still a cesspit littered in trash and dropkicks. I also found it rained a lot too...
Colors in GTA IV can be set however you want. Changing brightness, contrast and saturation in the display options can really make a difference. Saturation set at maximum kicks ass at night time, even though it makes sunsets too orange and bright.
As for the soundtrack, well again you can create the vibe you want. Driving through Hove Beach with Roman's taxi listening to Vladivostok FM or riding a chopper at night in the streets of Alderney listening to LRR feel completely different even though it' the same city. It adds some variety. There were different vibes instead of one. Like SA in fact.
My guess is that they will concentrate on Liberty City and Los Santos/San Andreas for the next decade.
What?!! SA is my favourite place but VC is the second one.I love VC and I like much more vice city than liberty city. I bet by VC as the next stop for the serie.
The city of Vice City had nothing good to show us, really. I'm not talking about the storyline or Tommy Vercetti or anything. The 80's vibe was cool. The soundtrack was good.
It was certainly better than Liberty City GTA III, but the actual Miami is way too boring to make a great game out of it. Since Rockstar always wants to re-imagine an existing city or region, they need the vibe of the city. They can't give a vibe to an existing city that has no vibe.
New York has a vibe. Los Angeles has a vibe. San Francisco has a vibe. So it's easy to re-imagine them into Liberty City, Los Santos or San Fierro.
Miami actually has no vibe. There's nothing but an average city, surrounded by huge-ass suburbs and beaches. We're not in the 80's anymore.
I come back from hiatus and see this old argument again,
When Vice City was released, nobody said a single thing of it being small because it was obviously quite larger than previous maps. It feels small now because of San Andreas. But heck, any GTA Game feels smaller than SA now.
I don`t understand the notion that Miami got nothing to offer in terms of diversity. How come the one post that detailed what is around Miami has been overlooked? More dazzling is Miami not offering anything outside of the 80`s. Obviously it was a whole decade set on fire because mostly of one city, but Miami has changed since then, it has expanded, it has grown. What Vice City and VCS have shown us is a glimpse of what the city is most known in terms of pop culture view:
But it shouldn`t be limited to it. Just like LA shouldn`t be limited only for being the capital of Films.
Which brings us to the next part. Not relevant in pop culture any longer? While La is bigger in that department (Hollywood and all) Miami has always been one of the main locations for filming and tv shows in the US:
The reason they chose Los Santos can be range from going back to the city they have used less, they wanted to draw in Los Angeles again (and particularly the "Heat" athmosphere), blah, whatever. It`s they`r game. Los Santos was bound to return.
Like Vice will be, make no mistake. You got sh*t like Burn Notice and Dexter. Miami never lost it`s "vibe" anyway, just like the others cities.
This post has been edited by BlackCorsair on Monday, Apr 16 2012, 17:55
My guess is that they will concentrate on Liberty City and Los Santos/San Andreas for the next decade.
What?!! SA is my favourite place but VC is the second one.I love VC and I like much more vice city than liberty city. I bet by VC as the next stop for the serie.
The city of Vice City had nothing good to show us, really. I'm not talking about the storyline or Tommy Vercetti or anything. The 80's vibe was cool. The soundtrack was good.
It was certainly better than Liberty City GTA III, but the actual Miami is way too boring to make a great game out of it. Since Rockstar always wants to re-imagine an existing city or region, they need the vibe of the city. They can't give a vibe to an existing city that has no vibe.
New York has a vibe. Los Angeles has a vibe. San Francisco has a vibe. So it's easy to re-imagine them into Liberty City, Los Santos or San Fierro.
Miami actually has no vibe. There's nothing but an average city, surrounded by huge-ass suburbs and beaches. We're not in the 80's anymore.
I come back from hiatus and see this old argument again,
When Vice City was released, nobody said a single thing of it being small because it was obviously quite larger than previous maps. It feels small now because of San Andreas. But heck, any GTA Game feels smaller than SA now.
I don`t understand the notion that Miami got nothing to offer in terms of diversity. How come the one post that detailed what is around Miami has been overlooked? More dazzling is Miami not offering anything outside of the 80`s. Obviously it was a whole decade set on fire because mostly of one city, but Miami has changed since then, it has expanded, it has grownth. What Vice City and VCS have shown us is a glimpse of what the city is in terms of pop culture view:
Which brings us to the next part. Not relevant in pop culture any longer? While La is bigger in that department (Hollywood and all) Miami has always been one of the main locations for filming and tv shows in the US:
The reason they chose Los Santos can be range from going back to the city they have used less, they wanted to draw in Los Angeles again (and particularly the "Heat" athmosphere), blah, whatever. It`s they`r game. Los Santos was bound to return.
Like Vice will be, make no mistake. You got sh*t like Burn Notice and Dexter. Miami never lost it`s "vibe" anyway, just like the others cities.
This.
The potential of Vice City, if given the next-gen treatment, is as good as any other of the R* cities...
Liberty City in III was only partially made up. The park in the middle of the central island, the skyscrapers, cold and rainy weather , the overall east coast feel. It still felt like NY.
This I agree. I felt GTA 3 had more of that gloomy, cold, helplessly dangerous vibe NY had. It felt perfectly with the whole "worst place in America" vibe.
This I felt was not there in GTA IV's rendition, as if R* attempted to make the place more "happy". Rain was far less frequent, and the city felt "orange" rather than "grey", something that would better fit LS/LA than NY.
Well, for me GTA III never gave me the feeling of NY. But GTA IV could match the feeling absolutely perfect. GTA VC and IV are the only games that felt perfectly for me. You take a walk in GTA IV, it's a rainy night, people running to their home holding their newspapers on their heads, the taxis horning, the guy asking me for money... GTA IV had the NY feeling and that's why i'm exited to see if R* can finally give me the LA feeling, because LS in GTA SA couldn't.
Official General Group: Members
Joined: Apr 13, 2010
QUOTE (BlackCorsair @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 17:44)
QUOTE (FCM @ Friday, Apr 13 2012, 22:00)
QUOTE (bud23 @ Friday, Apr 13 2012, 21:34)
QUOTE (FCM @ Friday, Apr 13 2012, 20:58)
They wont set games in Vice City anymore, I hope.
My guess is that they will concentrate on Liberty City and Los Santos/San Andreas for the next decade.
What?!! SA is my favourite place but VC is the second one.I love VC and I like much more vice city than liberty city. I bet by VC as the next stop for the serie.
The city of Vice City had nothing good to show us, really. I'm not talking about the storyline or Tommy Vercetti or anything. The 80's vibe was cool. The soundtrack was good.
It was certainly better than Liberty City GTA III, but the actual Miami is way too boring to make a great game out of it. Since Rockstar always wants to re-imagine an existing city or region, they need the vibe of the city. They can't give a vibe to an existing city that has no vibe.
New York has a vibe. Los Angeles has a vibe. San Francisco has a vibe. So it's easy to re-imagine them into Liberty City, Los Santos or San Fierro.
Miami actually has no vibe. There's nothing but an average city, surrounded by huge-ass suburbs and beaches. We're not in the 80's anymore.
I come back from hiatus and see this old argument again,
When Vice City was released, nobody said a single thing of it being small because it was obviously quite larger than previous maps. It feels small now because of San Andreas. But heck, any GTA Game feels smaller than SA now.
I don`t understand the notion that Miami got nothing to offer in terms of diversity. How come the one post that detailed what is around Miami has been overlooked? More dazzling is Miami not offering anything outside of the 80`s. Obviously it was a whole decade set on fire because mostly of one city, but Miami has changed since then, it has expanded, it has grown. What Vice City and VCS have shown us is a glimpse of what the city is most known in terms of pop culture view:
But it shouldn`t be limited to it. Just like LA shouldn`t be limited only for being the capital of Films.
Which brings us to the next part. Not relevant in pop culture any longer? While La is bigger in that department (Hollywood and all) Miami has always been one of the main locations for filming and tv shows in the US:
The reason they chose Los Santos can be range from going back to the city they have used less, they wanted to draw in Los Angeles again (and particularly the "Heat" athmosphere), blah, whatever. It`s they`r game. Los Santos was bound to return.
Like Vice will be, make no mistake. You got sh*t like Burn Notice and Dexter. Miami never lost it`s "vibe" anyway, just like the others cities.
@ BlackCorsair
I agree with you 100%
I have stated all the things you said on this many times before on here. All those people who keep saying, "Miami was mostly good for the 1980s" and that "a modern-day Miami does not have much happening or no vibe", are just talking rubbish and they don't know much about Miami to begin with.
All I know is if they re-did Vice City to include surrounding swamps/marshlands, we could haul off in one of these:
-surrounding marsh/swamp lands -Florida keys -Cuba and/or Puerto Rico possibly -Kennedy space center (I know it's more Orlando, but GTA maps are condensed so it could be included)
They could do a lot with Vice City, and I for one would love to see the fruits of their labor.
Vice City fanboy Group: Members
Joined: Oct 19, 2003
Because San Andreas didn't do enough justice in parodying Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Las Vegas individually. I'd love for the next games to be set in San Fierro and Las Venturas by themselves. Then I'll go back to Vice City.
Official General Group: Members
Joined: Apr 13, 2010
@ El_Diablo
You are being unreasonable in your slating of Vice City. You probably was not saying all those negative things about Vice City when it first came out, and you are only saying them because you were able to experience the huge maps of San Andreas and GTA IV, which both came out after VC. So yeah, right now its easy for you say, "Oh I don't like Vice City that much now, the map was not big enough".
VC was big enough for what it was, it was based on just ONE city, which was a 1980 Miami, and Miami back then was not a very big city like it is today. The city was linear in its design because that is how Miami looks in real-life, why don't you go and look at a real-life map of Miami and see for yourself. VC was flat, because, again in real-life, Miami and most of South Florida IS FLAT lowland terrain, with marshes, swamps and sprawling beaches. And there was definitely variety in VC's scenery, I thought it was brilliant - there were the luxury mansions of Starfish Island, Ocean Drive-style strip with all the bright neon lights, the stylish, towering hotel buildings of Washington Beach, the modern skyscrapers of Downtown VC, to the run-down ghetto slums of Little Haiti and Little Havana. If anything, I think VC was one of the most visually amazing, accurate and interesting locations in GTA, regardless of it size.
I agree with you on this though - "they chose Los Santos because they wanted to."
This post has been edited by Official General on Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 14:18
My opinion is SA was better in all features, even the map. But i still do like VC and would love to see rockstar return to it next. (its likely they are)
100% next GTA go to vice city (miami) and include some of the surrounding area like the everglades - and maybe throw in the occassional hurricaine where you see cars just fly away - would be funny and trippy.
Official General Group: Members
Joined: Apr 13, 2010
QUOTE (El_Diablo @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 19:54)
QUOTE (Official General @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 06:48)
@ El_Diablo
You are being unreasonable in your slating of Vice City. You probably was not saying all those negative things about Vice City when it first came out
I am not being unreasonable.
that's how I feel now because that's how I felt at the time, when it first came out. I enjoyed the game but I didn't care for the city. never have.
Well I'm sorry to hear you felt that way. I was totally immersed in the whole Vice City environment, its a shame you did'nt get that feeling, you sure missed out.
I didn't miss out on anything. I played the game to 100%. I just didn't like the city. stop parsing my own words in order to try and use them against me.
Vice City was boring. it was flat as a board, wasted huge amounts of space on empty terrain where there was NOTHING to do (like the beach and golf course), and had little-to-no variety in terms of scenery.
I'm not talking about the game itself, I'm talking about the city.
i think that the real reason VC seemed a little bit plain (the map itself, not the game) is because it didn't use the traditional 3 area progression, and the entire map unlocked a little bit too early.
Official General Group: Members
Joined: Apr 13, 2010
QUOTE (El_Diablo @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 20:36)
I didn't miss out on anything. I played the game to 100%. I just didn't like the city. stop parsing my own words in order to try and use them against me.
Vice City was boring. it was flat as a board, wasted huge amounts of space on empty terrain where there was NOTHING to do (like the beach and golf course), and had little-to-no variety in terms of scenery.
I'm not talking about the game itself, I'm talking about the city.
Like I said, I'm sorry you missed out, because it was the city itself in Vice City that greatly added to the brilliance of the gameplay experience.
Most GTA fans don't agree with your analysis, so its s shame you were one of the few who felt that way. There was plenty of things to do in VC, I'm not gonna go into it. I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm serious. If you really did not enjoy the city in VC, then really, you missed out man.
because it was the city itself in Vice City that greatly added to the brilliance of the gameplay experience.
No, in terms of city layout and map, VC was the worst city in the series. Not only was it flat, but there was so much wasted space. The beaches took a big part of the first island. The country club too (and since there is no normal road to get there with a car, we just rarely get there), so does the airport, and that empty space between Little Haiti and Downtown. And the main islands were too long compared to their width, they felt very narrow and we ended up using the same roads over and over again. I mean, just look at the second island's main road (going from Vice Port to Downtown), it was the only road that could get you from one side of the island to the other. It's supposed to be a city but the layout looks like it is countryside, with small neighbourhoods acting like small towns conected by a main road. It was definitely not a good layout. Liberty City in III was a much better city.
I loved VC as much as everyone here, but let's be serious, the city itself (not the vibe associated with it) was one of the few flaws of the game.
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
Grand Theft Auto V
