New GTA4 preview

its gonna be like Vice City. I really didnt care for the helicopters adn wish the planes were still in. I hope they sneak at least 1 or 2 hidden planes in there just for fun
 
Airplanes don't really fit in the context of the game though. With a state like San Andreas, sure...but what is the point of flying an airplane around New York City? If it were done realistically, you would be at the end of the map in five seconds.
 
A real city, eh? Figured it would happen sooner or later. Oh well. At long last, the new "GTA" has a numeral.
 
People, it's LIBERTY city.

I will bet any of you cash money if you still don't believe it.
 
Airplanes don't really fit in the context of the game though. With a state like San Andreas, sure...but what is the point of flying an airplane around New York City? If it were done realistically, you would be at the end of the map in five seconds.
It is for FUN! It defnetly would have been neat to fly a plane in the original Liberty City. If there are helicopters in the game, whats the big deal about throwing a plane or 2? It doesnt have to be a big part of it or a mission but a secret, unlockable or extra would be a good addition
 
It's Liberty City designed to look EXACTLY like New York City.

Yes...because it was meant to be a fictional NY in the first place. I don't see what you are trying to say? :huh:
 
Yes...because it was meant to be a fictional NY in the first place. I don't see what you are trying to say? :huh:

That's why people are calling it New York City. It has the Statue of Liberty, the Empire State Building. SO who cares if people call it NY instead of Liberty.
 
That's why people are calling it New York City. It has the Statue of Liberty, the Empire State Building. SO who cares if people call it NY instead of Liberty.


Because it's NOT New York? :huh:


That's like saying Sera's capital from Gears of War is London because it's based on the architecture. Because it's based on somewhere, that doesn't mean it is that place, no matter how similar.
 
Because it's NOT New York? :huh:


That's like saying Sera's capital from Gears of War is London because it's based on the architecture. Because it's based on somewhere, that doesn't mean it is that place, no matter how similar.

Close, but not quite. The game is accurately remodeled after NY, so to a degree it is NY, just they aren't gonna call it that. Also Gears might have been 'based' on London's architecture but it didn't actually remodel it, GTA IV is remodeling NY and calling it Liberty City.
 
Close, but not quite. The game is accurately remodeled after NY, so to a degree it is NY, just they aren't gonna call it that. Also Gears might have been 'based' on London's architecture but it didn't actually remodel it, GTA IV is remodeling NY and calling it Liberty City.


Liberty City is a fictional city based on a real one, much like Gotham City and Metropolis are based on real cities. It's NOT new york, even though it's as close as you can get a fictional city.
 
Liberty City is a fictional city based on a real one, much like Gotham City and Metropolis are based on real cities. It's NOT new york, even though it's as close as you can get a fictional city.

Again, who cares? Like you said Gotham and Metropolis are BASED on real cities, they are not exact duplicates of the city. Liberty is a spoof of NYC, like a Mad Magazine thing. Get-A-Life building as opposed to the MetLife building.

And like with Mad Magazine things, some say
"Did you read Super Duper Man?"
or
"Did you read the Mad version of Superman?"

What's the problem with people calling it NYC when they know it's Liberty?

Ther Liberty City in GTA3 was based on NYC, but it didn't look or feel anything like NYC. This Liberty looks to be exactly like NYC, Coney Island and all. It's only called Liberty so that they can take (pun intended) liberties and make jokes about New York without any backlash.
 
does it really matter? Matt, the orignial poster who mentioned NYC, did it to give people something to compare it to when thinking about planes and that is valid comparison that most people can be familiar with.
 
Ok It's New York. Whatever. If people enjoy being wrong that's cool.
 
and SA was a huge step back in terms of story line and substance. I'll sacrifice some of SA's cosmetic improvements for a return to classic GTA.
 
and SA was a huge step back in terms of story line and substance. I'll sacrifice some of SA's cosmetic improvements for a return to classic GTA.
it makes no sense though why there are no bikes. I could understand planes, but no bikes in a city modeled after NYC?
 
Why is it that I don't mind there being bikes?
I'm fine with jetpacks. That was so stupid.
My only concern is that NYC better seriously be NYC. It better be as big as the real thing, not the Liberty City size from GTA3. (That shyit is too small)

It better be like this:

boroughs.gif


:up:
 
and SA was a huge step back in terms of story line and substance. I'll sacrifice some of SA's cosmetic improvements for a return to classic GTA.

How so? The other characters and plots were basically rip offs from gangster movies, and were cliched and pretty one dimensional- CJ had different sides to him, and really only wanted the best for his neighbourhood.
 
it makes no sense though why there are no bikes. I could understand planes, but no bikes in a city modeled after NYC?

I agree. You can't walk through NYC without seeing a bike messenger or a delivery guy on a bike, or just people riding them through central park. It is either they want to save some add-ons for future installments or laziness.
 
How so? The other characters and plots were basically rip offs from gangster movies, and were cliched and pretty one dimensional- CJ had different sides to him, and really only wanted the best for his neighbourhood.

CJ was a horrible character and the plots were pretty much ripped off from Boyz in da Hood type movies.

It lacked in substance because while we had three cities and several little towns, there was no substance to any of them. In other GTA games you really get to see the subcultures of each city, and the satire of them is what makes the game great. GTA:SA had so much, that you only got to skim the surface of each aspect. Less is more.
 
CJ was a horrible character and the plots were pretty much ripped off from Boyz in da Hood type movies.
.


That's kinda a lazy comparison...it was NOTHING like Boyz in the Hood (unless you mean that it had black lead characters :huh: ). CJ was out to clean up his neighbourhood, kinda like a vigilante, and gets caught up between corrupt cops and the government. If that happened in boys in the hood, I must have seen the wrong movie.

CJ isn't some sterotypicial, shouting obsceneities italian mobster rip off, he is a good guy at heart, who is loyal and wants the best for his neighbourhood. He isn't in it for cash or greed.
 
I agree. You can't walk through NYC without seeing a bike messenger or a delivery guy on a bike, or just people riding them through central park. It is either they want to save some add-ons for future installments or laziness.
I smell microtransactions via DLC. I wonder how much they will charge
 
http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?act=ST&f=225&t=276329&st=0#entry4208102

Loads of scans from a PS magazine with lots of new info. My interest level is dropping...no bikes, jet packs, varied landscapes, can't work out or customise your character's physique...basically, a huge step back from san andreas.
Who cares? srsly...

First you start an argument from a statement that was just a valid point.

And it's not a step back. You buy a game for the story, graphics and stuff like that, not the fact that you can't make you're character look like a wrestler mkay...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"