So.. the next GTA

Post by **Foo** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:13 pm

What would you rather see in the next GTA game? An entirely new engine to keep up with the latest graphics advancement, or keeping with the same engine for the fourth time and making the gameplay deeper yet again?

Gotta say, I'm hoping for the second option. Hell, I hope they re-use the engine and the cities they've already created, and work on making more things possible.

Fully modabble cars, mo weapons, pickups, secrets.. all that shit... There's an obvious tradeoff in that if you spend money and time developing a new engine, you have to sacrifice time/money on developing the gameplay.

Also, wonder if at some point game development will get so complex, noone creates new engines from scratch anymore, they augment and develop the existing ones. I guess that happens to a degree already, and id's one of the pioneers of 'make and engine then license the shit outta it', but will it become more pronounced in future?

Anywhichway the next GTA is so far away it's depressing >=(

Post by **4days** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:49 pm

only just got tired of the last one, got a good half a year out of it. best ps2 game ever :icon14:

same engine would be fine, be really nice if they did something to smarten up the targetting system. spent a lot of time shouting things like 'i can see him, i'm looking at him, why the fuck aren't you looking at him?' at the telly playing this one.

Post by **TheRealZimbabwe** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:00 pm

I opt for a mix of the two. Where they rewrite the engine to allow better gfx, but still enhance the gameplay.

Post by **Kills On Site** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:01 pm

Well since I play them on the X-Box the graphics look nice, so second for me

Post by **Foo** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:03 pm

In an ideal world, that might happen, but as is often the case, rewrites mean less content.

Take UT2003. They merely improved the engine, but spent much time on extra content, and released that as UT2004, which was a bigger hit that '03.

Likewise take Doom 3. The time spent on that engine has surely impacted the amount of content that shipped with it. IIRC, that was a total code rewrite too.

At the same time, it's true that the coders are not the same people as who create the media, but the media creation peeps have to wait for a long time while engines are developed (and tools created) before they can start working on it.... when the coders are just improving an existing system, content creation can begin at project start (or nearabouts)

Post by **Dr_Watson** » Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:51 pm

i havn't liked GTA since they dropped the overhead camera.
it was much cooler when it was all "goofy" not really trying to be real.
when making violent games i think sureality is better than reality.

Post by **Foo** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:05 am

Fuck the storyline and violence.

The fun to be had in GTA isn't that you have to do violent things as part of a storyline.. the real hook of the game is that you're in a large semi-functioning city and able to roam and do as you please.

The game would hang together pretty well without the killing and with just a shit-ton of awesome cars to barrell around it.

The aim isn't violence, and hence nesting the game in the surreal isn't neccesary or even desirable. Proving an experience which related tightly to real-life experience while allowing the player to roam and interact is the clay that binds GTA's success.

Post by **Dr_Watson** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:41 am

they sure as hell do a good job marketing it as nothing but violence for violence sake.
and from the makers of manhunt, i really didn't expect much else.
maybe i'll play gta3 and give it a fair shake someday...

Post by **Foo** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 12:59 am

Not sure what kind of marketing imprint the games receive over there but personally I've not seen much marketing surrounding the GTA games, ever.... That said, I've seen one or two GTA: SA ads with 'Welcome to the jungle' playing over them, not violent really... but to get past the UK advert censors they perhaps released toned down media?

manhunt.... looked absolute shit. IMO the only good product rockstar put out is GTA itself, even midnight club is a bit iffy.

Even more reason, I reckon, why they should ALL just work on GTA and nothing but, make it kick even more ass.

Post by **Dr_Watson** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 1:08 am

from what you say you want from it... and why you like it... sounds like they should make GTA4 be an urban MMORPG; kinda like dopewars in 3d.

Post by **FragaGeddon** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:16 am

It'd be nice if you could build one bick huge parking garage to keep all your cars in. Let's say it cost you $5,000,000 to build it, that would be cool.

Post by **rep** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:38 am

Post WWIII America.

Post by **sirstrongbad** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:38 am

i agree, watson. all of my friends (and i) agree that it should allow for online play. whether or not it's like an mmorpg is beside the point. it should at least have co-op or some form of multiplayer.

Post by **Dr_Watson** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:43 am

gta3 doesn't have multiplayer?
wtf.. gta1 had lan play.

Post by **sirstrongbad** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:47 am

nope. all multiplayer aspects have been stripped since GTA3. crazy, i know. this game is just begging for online multiplayer.

Post by **dzjepp** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 2:56 am

Well for PC there's always Multi Theft Auto.

(It's been improved extensively since the first few trial releases).

http://www.mtavc.com/

Watty never played GTA3? Woah... I can safely say GTA3/VC/SA are the best examples of how a game can survive going from 2d

3d. If fits this franchise so perfectly, it's what GTA should of been from day one. :icon32: