Grand Theft Auto - San Andreas Details Revealed

Thanks to Eurogamer for its article revealing many new details about Rockstar North's ravenously-awaited PlayStation 2 title, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, which had first screenshots revealed during last week's E3 show. Hitherto unavailable information includes the setting ("comprising Los Santos (Los Angeles) where you start out, San Fierro (San Francisco) and Las Venturra (Las Vegas), it's an epic environment allegedly six times the size of Vice City") and unorthodox new features ("through dozens of accurately modelled restaurants and other eateries, the criminal wannabe will be able to top up his stamina meter, and actually visibly gain weight"), with Eurogamer concluding happily: "We fancy that Rockstar North's dark and satirical sense of humour, and passionate obsession with minutely detailed gameplay will see us through many a lonely night in San Andreas."

Comments

BUT

[Lord Bitman]

is it possible to obey the law?
will police get all over you just for not slamming on your brakes when a light turns red?
can I hit someone over the head, drag them into a warehouse, chain them up, and fuck them with a dagger?
If I kill someone, will the police not just give up after 5 minutes of looking for me?
Are acciidents persistent?
Can I completely eliminate the prostitute population of the city?
If I start killing all the taxi drivers, will the taxi drivers stay home?
Will all the various murders which are just too fucking easy to pull off in vice city be harder to do en-masse?

I want a game that will let me kill people, but will beat me down if I dont do it clean!

Re:BUT

[Triprotic]

I want a game that will let me kill people, but will beat me down if I dont do it clean!

You've never tried Hitman?
Ok granted it's not on the same scale as GTA, but it does the job. (Shame the Hitman series seems to be getting worse with each new game)

Anyway, back on topic...
Reading that article it sounds quite promising. I'm still a little worried that not putting it in the 70s would make the game lose the tounge in cheek that Vice City had lots of!

Re:BUT

[Captain Nitpick]

Ever play GTA 1? It was a very revolutionary game when it came out (the "killer app" for the PS2)

Eh? Grand Theft Auto 1 a killer app for the PS2?

I think you've confused it with Grand Theft Auto 3.

GAMBLING!!!!

[g-san]

I can't wait to go throw down a million bucks on red then chain gun the whole casino when it comes up black.

First GTA - San Andreas site

[pheph]

Forum, pix, info and more at GTA-SA.com.

Could be cool, could be cool

[MilenCent]

I've only recently started playing the GTA games, and they're pretty cool. Not for the whole criminal focus, though I understand there are people who like that sort of thing, but for all the submissions and stuff. When I found out that GTA3 had its very own Crazy Taxi mode I nearly died.

To me, that's what makes GTA worth playing: the giant sandbox play style. Like Zelda taking place in a real city.

Indeed, GTA is a real argument against setting your gigantic sprawling action-adventure game in a fantastic setting. Because when you see a taxi running down the street, you immediately understand what that means, that there's a guy inside running fares for customers, and in general how that works. A sci-fi or fantasy implementation of that would have to do some extra work to connect that concept with that game's world.

It's possible, mind you, and one of the great things about Zelda is how they manage to put in a little of that despite the somewhat alien setting, but it doesn't have the same feeling of verisimilitude GTA has.

On the other hand, um, uh, GTA's talk radio stations cycle too much! Yeah!

Did Eurogamer.net plagarize ?

[keyshawn632]

This article was the feature of the June 2004 issue of Game Informer [the magazine].

Eurogamer's article seems to have almost "ripped" complete sentences, verbatim, from the GI magazine article [if my memory serves me correct; I read GI's article yesterday @ the library].

Can anyone confirm my suspicions ?

better be careful...

[justforaday]

You'd better be careful when you pick up that pretty "female" prostitute in San Fierro.. :-p

Re:Rockstar in a Rut

[Babbster]

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but what you're describing is the case for MOST game developers. Id: FPS (beyond graphics, did Quake really revolutionize anything?). Maxis: SimXXXX (I guess they've had TWO revolutions in SimCity and The Sims). BioWare: Baldur's Gate (their RPGs are great, but they're variations on a theme). Westwood: Dune/C&C (RTS). Et cetera.

Twenty years ago, a single company could be cranking out 10 different games a year because, well, it would take a total of 10 programmers (each game requiring support personnel, but just one true "creator") to accomplish it. Added into this was that customers would only really expect one gameplay style (one "thing to do") per game. Right now, it's extremely rare and difficult to get a good team together that can excel in multiple genres. If you've got a group of people who can do an awesome RPG, there's a better-than-even chance that the same team isn't going to be able to develop an awesome FPS. Add in the high monetary risk factor and it could kill a company to even try.

Re:Ascetic Variations

[Babbster]

My only thought would be this: If a company is in a good rut, then I say stick with it. If the new GTA sucks, then by all means I would be calling for them to try something else. But the truth is that Vice City was a better game than GTA3, so I'm happy to give them the benefit of the doubt and grab San Andreas.

In addition, I would mention that there's no shortage of games available and on the way in a multitude of styles and genres. If you're tired of GTA, then buy something from some other company. It's certainly not necessary that one buys games from Rockstar alone.

Short version: While I can hardly disagree with your facts, I think it's complaining for the sake of complaining instead of complaining about a real "problem."