Neoseeker.com Forum Thread: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover - page 9

reprinted from http://www.neoseeker.com/forums/
original thread: http://www.neoseeker.com/forums/55711/t1789248-grand-theft-auto-5s-three-protagonists-revealed-on-game-informers-december-cover/9.htm


Author:   Ville_Valo
Date:   Nov 11, 12 at 7:19pm (PST)
Subject:   Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote PEStar
The cod4 campaign did the whole switching between characters thing brilliantly, you started off as a black yank, he died, then you were a white british man, then another one, and so on. But it was still amazing.
But that was sequential, this will allow real-time switching between roles, mid-mission.



Author:   Andy Jay
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 3:02am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Demonfurby
quote Andy Jay
Can see this being handled beautifully if done like modern warfare with the banded storylines instead of a pick and choose system.
lol

I hope not
This, quite frankly smashing and fantastic post, could do with being shoved somewhere between where the sun doesnt shine and where the only woman who'll ever go near, will be your mother.

quote Ville_Valo
But that was sequential, this will allow real-time switching between roles, mid-mission.
Yeah, I'm not 100% sure on this, but arent you the guy who thought Driver San Francisco's switching bullshit was amazing. Now, I never played it, but did it actually start with Tanner, a near..... 70 year old man, learning his trade atop a tibetan mountain range? Probably not, but then, that would be ridiculous.


Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous. If it's automatically done with a cutscene to explain why, then it'll work.



Author:   KR_1250
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 3:08am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Andy Jay
Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous.


Why?

quote
If it's automatically done with a cutscene to explain why, then it'll work.
Wouldnt that be more annoying? So every time i wanna change to a new character i have to watch a cut scene?

I certainly hope they dont do it like that. Maybe im picking you up wrong.



Author:   Andy Jay
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 3:38am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote KR_1250
quote Andy Jay
Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous.


Why?
Because you lose an element of realism. Having a button on the controller to switch characters... in grand theft auto.... come on man, be serious.
quote
quote
If it's automatically done with a cutscene to explain why, then it'll work.
Wouldnt that be more annoying? So every time i wanna change to a new character i have to watch a cut scene?

I certainly hope they dont do it like that. Maybe im picking you up wrong.
The issue there is that you actually want to be able to do it. If they implement it, god I hope not, there probably wouldnt be a cutscene, but say for example, in a bank robbery, you start as one guy, then you cover him as he cracks the sfe then you're the getaway driver after that. How would that be a bad thing? I suppose it would come down to having a command on screen that says "press x for tony" or something like that. I guess it could work, but only if it's pre-designated if you get me.



Author:   BlackLabel
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 3:45am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Andy Jay
quote KR_1250
quote Andy Jay
Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous.


Why?
Because you lose an element of realism. Having a button on the controller to switch characters... in grand theft auto.... come on man, be serious.
GTA IV was too realistic to the point where it wasn't much fun. I think a return to the San Andreas ways of doing things will be better as it may actually be fun which is what a game should be. Yes ground some of it in realism that's cool but at least make the game fun and if being able to switch to a guy with a rocket launcher, then to the guy driving, then to the guy gunning people down is fun then I'm all for it.. At the end of the day games are meant to be fun and GTA IV wasn't fun, so I'm glad they went back to the drawing board and tweaked some things.



Author:   KR_1250
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 4:09am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Andy Jay
Because you lose an element of realism. Having a button on the controller to switch characters... in grand theft auto.... come on man, be serious.
Ah, right. Just in your opinion? I thought you were saying it wouldnt work mechanically. Well thats fair enough, IMO it sound pretty decent.

In GTAIV there was no character switching and the game was all serious. It was one of the most dissapointing games i have ever played personally. I welcome the change from this taking itself too seriously thing. GTA is not a very serious franchise. I like realistic guns, cars, map, physics and nothing else. I like the story, characters, player abilities and plot themes to be somewhat rediculous.

quote
The issue there is that you actually want to be able to do it. If they implement it, god I hope not, there probably wouldnt be a cutscene, but say for example, in a bank robbery, you start as one guy, then you cover him as he cracks the sfe then you're the getaway driver after that. How would that be a bad thing? I suppose it would come down to having a command on screen that says "press x for tony" or something like that. I guess it could work, but only if it's pre-designated if you get me.
Dont think i follow you exactly.

I guess it comes down to personal preference. For me R* dropped the ball with GTAIV in many areas. I welcome a solid change from that formula and dont really see a reason why this cant work. I mean R* could screw it up and impliment it badly sure, but i see nothing wrong with the concept itself if done properly. (If it takes any more than a few seconds to switch for example then i'd get pissed off very quickly).

This three character thing also has another benifit. If a player doesnt like one character he will surely find something in common with one of them. Im guessing we will all adopt a "go to" character who best fits our personalities. It'll be nice not to be lumped with one of them. (I didnt perticularly take to CJ in GTA:SA and although he was a great character i had nothing in common with him and felt kind of detached the whole time. Now i have 3 personalities to choose from.

And I dont wanna say too much here but who knows what they are gonna do with co-op multiplayer? That could provide a pretty watertight explenation of the main reason for having characters.



Author:   Andy Jay
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 5:49am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote BlackLabel
quote Andy Jay
quote KR_1250
quote Andy Jay
Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous.


Why?
Because you lose an element of realism. Having a button on the controller to switch characters... in grand theft auto.... come on man, be serious.
GTA IV was too realistic to the point where it wasn't much fun. I think a return to the San Andreas ways of doing things will be better as it may actually be fun which is what a game should be. Yes ground some of it in realism that's cool but at least make the game fun and if being able to switch to a guy with a rocket launcher, then to the guy driving, then to the guy gunning people down is fun then I'm all for it.. At the end of the day games are meant to be fun and GTA IV wasn't fun, so I'm glad they went back to the drawing board and tweaked some things.
If you didnt find a way to have fun on IV, you didnt try hard enough.I think, in the grand scheme of things, people (myself included here, it's not a dig) expected far too much from IV. With the graphic shift from 2nd gen to 3rd, the classic cartoon violence of the PS2 games had to be altered. The focus for developers these days isnt about hiding jumbo jets and driving around in ice cream vans, it's the idea of building a living, breathing environment. Something that is kind of far fetched, but not so far that it's bordering on the ridiculous. Something real.

The other side to consider from IV is that it was Liberty City. GTA III was the most serious of the PS2 generation, it was colder and less flamboyant than Vice City and San Andreas, sure it maintained the crazyness of GTA, but it was a dreary and cold environment where comic relief came from the radio and *bleep* all else. The ideal has been and probably always will be that Liberty is the serious city, Vice is the crazy city, and San Andreas is the sprawling combination of the two.

GTAV will maintain a certain level of the seriousness found in IV because of the afforementioned desire to build something real. Red Dead was proof that Rockstar are moving in a new direction. They understand that people will buy Saints Row for full on cartoon violence so they are more centered on creating something palpable. It's the same reason that Naughty Dog are making Uncharted, not Jak and Daxter: The more you can do, the more real you want it to be.

Sure GTAIV had it's flaws and yes it wanst all that it was cracked up to be, but it was their first attempt on a new platform. GTAIII was, and still is, a fantastic game, but it's so difficult to say that Vice City and San Andreas were better than it. It just shows us that the potential is there and it will be improved upon.


quote KR_1250
Ah, right. Just in your opinion? I thought you were saying it wouldnt work mechanically. Well thats fair enough, IMO it sound pretty decent.
Of course yeah, but it's because I dont like the idea of it. One mans meat......



quote KR_1250
Dont think i follow you exactly.
What I meant there was the situation where you get to a checkpoint of sorts and the game gives you the option of who to be for the next segment, I feel that could work out better than just randomly being able to switch to whoever you want like in a soccer game or something.



I dont want people to get me wrong, I'm *bleep*ing dying to play it and no doubt I'll spend days of my life playing it, I just dont want to be disappointed. I want this to be the jump from III to San Andreas: essentials maintained, but vastly improved all round.



Author:   Demonfurby
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:11am (PST)
Subject:   Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Andy Jay
quote Demonfurby
quote Andy Jay
Can see this being handled beautifully if done like modern warfare with the banded storylines instead of a pick and choose system.
lol

I hope not
This, quite frankly smashing and fantastic post, could do with being shoved somewhere between where the sun doesnt shine and where the only woman who'll ever go near, will be your mother.

Exactly the eloquence and grace I'd expect from a cod fan



Author:   Andy Jay
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:15am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Demonfurby
quote Andy Jay
quote Demonfurby
quote Andy Jay
Can see this being handled beautifully if done like modern warfare with the banded storylines instead of a pick and choose system.
lol

I hope not
This, quite frankly smashing and fantastic post, could do with being shoved somewhere between where the sun doesnt shine and where the only woman who'll ever go near, will be your mother.

Exactly the eloquence and grace I'd expect from a cod fan

Hahahaha, this from someone who said "lol, I hope not". This is for you sir.



Author:   KR_1250
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:19am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Andy Jay
If you didnt find a way to have fun on IV, you didnt try hard enough.I think, in the grand scheme of things, people (myself included here, it's not a dig) expected far too much from IV. With the graphic shift from 2nd gen to 3rd, the classic cartoon violence of the PS2 games had to be altered. The focus for developers these days isnt about hiding jumbo jets and driving around in ice cream vans, it's the idea of building a living, breathing environment. Something that is kind of far fetched, but not so far that it's bordering on the ridiculous. Something real.
But they failed at this absolutely miserably in many eyes. I mean sure sacrifice some idiocy for realism IF YOU ARE infact going to creat a realistic scenario. GTAIV was very very monolayered. It was not realistic. The entire game existed on the surface. Scratch off that layer and you are left with nothing. It felt like wandering through a city of zombies. It looked realistic, it didnt play that way.

And in any case no way do i want to play a game where I have to try hard to have fun. Im looking for the exact opposite. Try to succeed fine, try hard to beat a high score also fine. But try hard to have fun? Thats pretty much exactly why i hated GTAIV.

quote
Sure GTAIV had it's flaws and yes it wanst all that it was cracked up to be, but it was their first attempt on a new platform. GTAIII was, and still is, a fantastic game, but it's so difficult to say that Vice City and San Andreas were better than it. It just shows us that the potential is there and it will be improved upon.
I understand GTAIV was a technical platform meant to be built on. But the developers still missed a lot of oppertunity in the name of realism. The balance was not well adressed. And its not in anyway difficult for me personally to say GTA:VC and GTA:SA were better. They were just better IMO.


quote
What I meant there was the situation where you get to a checkpoint of sorts and the game gives you the option of who to be for the next segment, I feel that could work out better than just randomly being able to switch to whoever you want like in a soccer game or something.
Well, ofcourse you are entitled to your opinion but for me? HELL NO! I dont wanna be sucked out of the action into a menu to select who i want. That sounds like a nightmare. Nah, i wouldnt be at all happy with that. I dont want to be continually bogged down in that way.

Ah well, each to their own.



Author:   Andy Jay
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:22am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote KR_1250
Well, ofcourse you are entitled to your opinion but for me? HELL NO! I dont wanna be sucked out of the action into a menu to select who i want. That sounds like a nightmare. Nah, i wouldnt be at all happy with that. I dont want to be continually bogged down in that way.

Ah well, each to their own.
Yes but changing between characters in any way shape or form without a constructive reason will bog you down and be plain weird.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see. you never know, it could be a combination of everything and be shite or brilliant.



Author:   KR_1250
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:36am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
quote Andy Jay
Yes but changing between characters in any way shape or form without a constructive reason will bog you down and be plain weird.
Instantaneous character changes seem to be the opposite of bogging down for me. They could maybe have the opposite effect and overwhelm or confuse the payer but certainly not bog anything down like a mission stop, checkpoint then menu.

quote
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. you never know, it could be a combination of everything and be shite or brilliant.
Yeah thats very true, dont want to get ahead of ourselves i suppose.



Author:   Demonfurby
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:43am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
The ridiculousness of saying anything about cod is beautifully done doesn't warrant anything other than a passing laugh.

Just so I don't get nailed for derailing the thread:

quote Andy Jay
quote Ville_Valo
But that was sequential, this will allow real-time switching between roles, mid-mission.
Yeah, I'm not 100% sure on this, but arent you the guy who thought Driver San Francisco's switching bullshit was amazing. Now, I never played it, but did it actually start with Tanner, a near..... 70 year old man, learning his trade atop a tibetan mountain range? Probably not, but then, that would be ridiculous.


Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous. If it's automatically done with a cutscene to explain why, then it'll work.
Haha, you're calling something bullshit when you've never even experienced it? The way Driver did it was cool and really innovative.

Wait, let me catch you up, I probably lost you. Innovation is when the norm is changed as to keep things fresh and get new ideas into a product or idea so the product doesn't become stagnant and boring. I know, not everything in the gaming industry just slaps a new paintjob on their product and ships it out to make as much money as they can from their sheep. But keep up.

quote Andy Jay
quote KR_1250
quote Andy Jay
Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous.


Why?
Because you lose an element of realism. Having a button on the controller to switch characters... in grand theft auto.... come on man, be serious.
quote
quote
If it's automatically done with a cutscene to explain why, then it'll work.
Haha, god forbid the series that allows you to kill one hundred people, run around for a few minutes and have everything be peachy when you go into the city a second later destroy realism by allowing you to change characters on the fly in the coolest way ever.



quote Andy Jay
quote BlackLabel
quote Andy Jay
[quote=KR_1250|message:33886597][quote=Andy Jay|message:33886583]Having an option, in a game like GTA, to manually switch between characters mid-mission is ridiculous.


Why?
Because you lose an element of realism. Having a button on the controller to switch characters... in grand theft auto.... come on man, be serious.
GTA IV was too realistic to the point where it wasn't much fun. I think a return to the San Andreas ways of doing things will be better as it may actually be fun which is what a game should be. Yes ground some of it in realism that's cool but at least make the game fun and if being able to switch to a guy with a rocket launcher, then to the guy driving, then to the guy gunning people down is fun then I'm all for it.. At the end of the day games are meant to be fun and GTA IV wasn't fun, so I'm glad they went back to the drawing board and tweaked some things.
If you didnt find a way to have fun on IV, you didnt try hard enough.I think, in the grand scheme of things, people (myself included here, it's not a dig) expected far too much from IV. With the graphic shift from 2nd gen to 3rd, the classic cartoon violence of the PS2 games had to be altered. The focus for developers these days isnt about hiding jumbo jets and driving around in ice cream vans, it's the idea of building a living, breathing environment. Something that is kind of far fetched, but not so far that it's bordering on the ridiculous. Something real.
Their focus is such because doing realistic shit requires almost no creative thinking and sells like hotcakes to the general sheepish public. It's a disgusting epidemic that happened primarily when cod starting becoming the biggest thing in gaming ever, because, as I mentioned, sheep buy it every year without hesitance because EXPLOSIONS ARE COOOL. The reason why cod is popular is the same reason the recent Transformers movies are popular. Which is pathetic. Don't pretend it's because devs think that it's the best direction for pushing the boundaries of what it possible in gaming, because it isn't. It's exactly the opposite.


quote
Sure GTAIV had it's flaws and yes it wanst all that it was cracked up to be, but it was their first attempt on a new platform. GTAIII was, and still is, a fantastic game, but it's so difficult to say that Vice City and San Andreas were better than it.
No it isn't. III was boring as *bleep*. Hell, Vice City for the most part was boring.


quote
I'm *bleep*ing dying to play it and no doubt I'll spend days of my life playing it,


"could do with being shoved somewhere between where the sun doesnt shine and where the only woman who'll ever go near, will be your mother."

I'll just leave this here. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrite



Author:   KR_1250
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:48am (PST)
Subject:   re: Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
Guys.

Its just a *bleep*in game.



Author:   Demonfurby
Date:   Nov 12, 12 at 6:49am (PST)
Subject:   Grand Theft Auto 5's three protagonists revealed on Game Informer's December cover
-------------------------------------------
Oh, I know. I just couldn't help myself


Copyright Neo Era Media, Inc. 1999-2014.
All Rights Reserved.