GTA San Andreas Dripfeeds More Info To Eager Public

Thanks to GameSpot for its updated preview of Rockstar's ravenously awaited Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. The article first gets down to basics, explaining: "The state of San Andreas will feature three main cities, each inspired by real-life locales. The city of Los Santos is based on Los Angeles, San Fierro is derived from San Francisco, and Las Venturas will mirror the glitz of Las Vegas", before delving into new mechanics like character strength ("You'll be able to visit one of several gyms spread throughout San Andreas so that you work out to stay in peak physical health"), and comments on audio that lend credence to a rumored partial tracklisting of recent ("Despite San Andreas' superficially hip-hop trappings, the game's soundtrack will feature a full range of early '90s music".) IGN PS2 also has a new hands-on preview, including fresh info on customizable in-game tattoos ("[designed by] Mister Cartoon... [featuring] gang names, guns, and women.")

Comments

Same old engine?

[VJoseph]

I'm starting to wonder if Rockstar will ever create something to replace the GTA3 engine. Their graphics are starting to fall behind. Each game they bring out just looks like new maps, skins and missions for GTA3.

Re:Same old engine?

[NanoGator]

So?

Re:Same old engine?

[hawkbug]

It's called the PS2 - it sucks. It only has 32 megs of ram, and a 300 mhz cpu. Granted, it's not a standard processor - it's pretty tricked out, but still, 300 mhz pales in comparison to the Xbox or a PC. I own a PS2 because I love the selection of games out for it, and for me, the graphics are acceptible - but if you check out a game like Far Cry on the PC and then play GTA on the PS2, you will be disappointed. Sony REALLY needs to make the PS3 kick a lot of ass, or they will fall behind the PC even further.

Re:Same old engine?

[Babbster]

Well, gee, the PC has had better graphics capabilities than the PS2 from jump. Yet, far [far, far] more PS2 games are sold than PC games. It seems to me that, as a platform, the PC needs to find a way to compete with consoles.

Re:Same old engine?

[incubusnb]

i've heard this argument from Graphics whores more than once, i'd probably say this is the biggest argument against the PS2, but in all reality, it just doesn't hold up.

it has been proven time and time again that Graphics != Gameplay. For example, Nethack is still one of the most beloved games of all time and is still widely played, its still just ASCII (the way the hardcore play it anyways).

frankly, if all they ever did was use the same engine and just add new maps, make them bigger than the last game, and add a few new features each game, i would still pay full price for it and play it for countless hundreds of hours.

that being said, there are rumors that this will be the last GTA game to use this engine, and it'll be the last PS2 GTA game, the next will be on PS3

Re:Same old engine?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Well, gee, the PC has had better graphics capabilities than the PS2 from jump. Yet, far [far, far] more PS2 games are sold than PC games. It seems to me that, as a platform, the PC needs to find a way to compete with consoles."

You can't use a console to play /., the greatest text adventure of all time.

(Except a dreamcast, or PS2+linux, or modded xbox+linux, gamecube (soon), and maybe even PS1+linux if you can get some kind of networking over the link cable... ok my point is less valid than I thought...)

Re:Same old engine?

[kisrael]

i've heard this argument from Graphics whores more than once, i'd probably say this is the biggest argument against the PS2, but in all reality, it just doesn't hold up.
it has been proven time and time again that Graphics != Gameplay. For example, Nethack is still one of the most beloved games of all time and is still widely played, its still just ASCII (the way the hardcore play it anyways).

Yeah, but its not just graphics....I've heard things like the "cars disappear when your back is turned" gameplay ties in directly with the limitations of the PS2. It really puts a crimp in what otherwise feels like a decent simulation.

And damn it, I wish Microsoft would lure Rockstar to make the next GTA an Xbox exclusive... historically, Sony has always had 1 or 2 games I like per system, and that's it.

Re:Same old engine?

[Chess_the_cat]

I've heard this argument from Graphics whores more than once, i'd probably say this is the biggest argument against the PS2, but in all reality, it just doesn't hold up....It has been proven time and time again that Graphics != Gameplay

Yeah but the argument against the PS2 is why buy a game for it when games today are released on all the consoles and the PS2 version is the shittiest? Are you telling me that given the choice between two games that are otherwise identical you'll take the one with crappy graphics because you're so hardcore? What?

Re:Same old engine?

[Brakz0rz]

hooey.

I Played both Far Cry and Vice City for the pc,in that order. I got way more replay and fun value from the GTA title. Graphics quality means jack compared to fun quality.

Re:Same old engine?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah but imagine Vice City with Far Cry's graphics! Could be a candidate for best game ever IMHO.

Re:Same old engine?

[VJoseph]

How am I a troll for pointing out a fact that many people in the gaming community are talking about? Saying the better graphic whould be nice, doesn't not make me a "graphics whore", as one person here said.

While I will be the first to say that graphics to not equal great gameplay, there is no doubt that graphics are important to gamers. The reason so may gamers are drooling over Doom 3 is the graphics (and it is from id). The reason we go out and buy the latest consoles and graphic cards if for great graphic. Nobody who has a newer console or graphics card can honestly say they don't care about graphics.

I know my karma will be punished for saying this, but I have to say it anyways.

Re:Same old engine?

[suyashs]

Haha, good disclaimer! I am using dillo on PS2 Linux running kernel 2.2.21 to read this right now...its not the best system by all means, but it is pretty cool with all the exploits and stuff you can run...

Re:Same old engine?

[Blakey Rat]

For example, Nethack is still one of the most beloved games of all time and is still widely played, its still just ASCII (the way the hardcore play it anyways).

Oh, please. What the hell are you talking about? There are about a dozen people in the world who love Nethack, and all of them are Slashdot posters. I polled my friends and family once, and not a single person had even heard of it. (Anecdote = fact, right?)

But seriously, most people into PC gaming now started around Half-Life or later... other than the HUGE earlier games (Wolf3D, Doom, XCom: UFO Defense, SimCity, few others), they don't know anything about them. (For instance, nobody I knew except one other gamer knew that Morrowind was actually the third game in the Elder Scrolls series.)

But nobody plays Nethack. Hell, there are probably more people playing Mission: Thunderbolt than Nethack. (What!? You've never heard of Mission: Thunderbolt? But it's "one of the most beloved games of all time and still widely played!")

Yeah, graphics don't equal gameplay, yada yada yada, but for criminy's sake come up with a better example!

Re:Same old engine?

[metamatic]

The PS2 CPU may only be 300MHz, but it has 6 other processors.

Re:Same old engine?

[hawkbug]

6? I was aware of the graphics (emotion engine) and the main CPU. Please clue me in on what 4 other processors this thing has, and no, the memory controllers and such do not count.

Re:Same old engine?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who cares about graphics? I would hope Rockstar would know better, but I'd much rather play a great game with a good story and bearable graphics than a game that's all about the graphics.

Re:Same old engine?

[kubrick]

I think the PS2 uses the same CPU as the PS1 as an I/O processor (and uses it as the main processor while running PS1 games).

Re:Same old engine?

[Rayonic]

> its still just ASCII (the way the hardcore play it anyways).

Bah. For anyone picking up the game today, there's no reason not to use a tileset. I mean, why go through the trouble of memorizing the meaning of various colored letters, when a dragon can look like a little dragon?

I mean, it's the same game either way.

Re:Same old engine?

[metamatic]

See http://www.scee.sony.co.uk/sceesite/files/presenta tions/agdc2002/PS2forPCprogrammers.pdf

IOP: Input/Output Processor, which since it's basically a PSOne, *does* count.

SPU2: Sound processor.

VU0: Vector processor #1.

VU1: Vector processor #2.

GS: Graphics processor.

IPU: Image processor.

FPU: Floating point processor. ...the "Emotion Engine" being made up of a bunch of processors. Sony have gradually been reducing the chip count by (for example) integrating the GS, VU units and IPU onto a single chip instead of separate chips, allowing it to cut prices without losing money.

Point is, the architecture is very unlike a PC; I don't know of any PC that has two VPUs and two GPUs. So just talking about the CPU speed in MHz of the EE core is misleading.

Re:Same old engine?

[wheany]

I know my karma will be punished for saying this, but I have to say it anyways.

Who cares? Honestly.

Re:Same old engine?

[Ectospheno]

Then why are all of the XBox and PC users complaining loudly on every GTA: San Andreas board on the web about having to wait for a port? I mean after all -- its just a crappy PS2 game right :)

Re:Same old engine?

[slumpy]

It is true though fanboys, the graphics are pretty lame for GTA. I love my PS2, but GTA got old really quick.

Re:Same old engine?

[tartley]

Google reports: Results 1 - 10 of about 225,000 for nethack as opposed to: Results 1 - 10 of about 947 for "mission: thunderbolt" (regardless of whether the colon is included or not) My conclusion: Nethack is more popular than M:T, by a factor of a thousand or so.

Re:Same old engine?

[hawkbug]

It's a crappy PS2 game that allows you to kill hookers and steal cars. Some people seem to enjoy that sort of thing...

Re:Same old engine?

[obeythefist]

Who cares about graphics?

People who own PC's, who paid money for 3D accelerators. Also people who bought Xboxes to play games on.

So you don't care about graphics, but you stipulate that a game must have "bearable" graphics, we'll assume that you intend to be the judge of whether graphics are "bearable" or not? I would suggest then that you also care about graphics. Way to answer your own question in the negatory.

Re:Same old engine?

[obeythefist]

PC architecture is very different, with the traditional layout being a dedicated GPU for rendering and a very very generic CPU for doing any and all things imaginable. The PC is definately a jack of all trades.

The speed of the CPU is slightly relevant, however the key, absolute key area where the console can be considered suitable for playing games is because every single transistor, every bit of memory is optimised like crazy just to make the games work.

PC's on the other hand have a *lot* more power than a console, but games don't tend to be as heavily optimised for two reasons - firstly developers get acceptable results quite easily because of the power of the platform, and secondly they can't afford to get too specific, because even platforms from the same manufacturer (eg intel) have vastly different capabilities (look at the IPC of a P3 vs a P4!).

However, with regards to console performance, consoles reach their limit very quickly with regards to optimisations, although it is quite remarkable to see the things the PS2 is capable of, it's only because the developers are doing so much with so little. I don't think we'll be seeing DooM3 any time soon - and whether you think it's a fun game or not, you can't deny that DooM3 establishes a very high precedent in terms of production quality that the 6 processors in a PS2 just won't be able to meet.

Re:Same old engine?

[obeythefist]

Yeah I have noticed that although Rockstar makes significant improvements to the graphics engine for the PC version of GTA, it is still suffering from the low polygon counts and poor use of features that it inherits from the console version.

Running the game at 1600x1200 with FSAA and aniso filtering does make it look far better than the PS/2 would ever be able to, however GTA does look very dated in comparison to some of the newer PC games.

Still the gameplay of GTA has always been the primary driver (and the graphics for consoles as well, although I always find reviewing graphics for a console an amusing concept considering the hardware is very constraining so developers are limited in what they can do, especially when you consider what a properly configured PC can do). Playing GTA on PC is much like playing a slightly older game that is still fun - many people play Counterstrike on PC for the gameplay rather than the graphics.

GTA is also in the rare position that is is practically alone in it's class, therefore has little or no competition apart from, well, Mafia (which in turn was an excellent game in its own right).

Re:Same old engine?

[obeythefist]

False assertion. Nethack is simply more popular amongst web developers and possibly bloggers. There may be a vast community of M:T players who simply refuse to connect to the internet or mention their sacred game on websites. Yeah.

Re:Same old engine?

[obeythefist]

I'll agree with that, but coming from Far Cry straight into DooM3, the graphics aren't the biggest wow factor - it's the intricate and high level of detail in the level design and the incredibly high production values. Everything in the environment has been designed to make the gameplay very immersive, which has really impressed me - DooM3 is less of a cookie-cutter FPS than I was anticipating.

I mean, sure, DooM3 brings my rig to its very knees, but it's doing so much with what I have I don't really mind.

And to support your original argument - if nobody cared about graphics we'd all still be playing NES/C64/EGA/CGA games!

Re:Same old engine?

[tartley]

hee. It's all good. My new programming project I just decieded on yesterday? VecHack (working title): A Roguelike but implimented with very simple vector graphics, in a 2D rotateable, scaleable polygon world. Python & openGL, I think.

Re:Same old engine?

[metamatic]

Yeah, I'm amazed at what can be achieved on the GameCube, considering it has less power than my ageing Mac. Just shows what software developers can do if they really put their minds to it.

About the soundtrack...

[Anonymous Coward]

Even though they have been quite on it, has there been any word on Rockstar releasing it on CD like they did with Vice City? Last time with Vice City they let it be known in advance, but with a few months away for GTA SA they sure haven't said much.

I think they did a good job on the Vice City CDs, Rockstar's picks were a lot better then the those crummy "Hitz of the year XYZ" compilation CDs.

Re:About the soundtrack...

[MC Negro]

Even though they have been quite on it, has there been any word on Rockstar releasing it on CD like they did with Vice City? Last time with Vice City they let it be known in advance, but with a few months away for GTA SA they sure haven't said much.

From PSX Extreme, who ripped it from Play Magazine. A partial playlist (consistent with the claim in the article) --

• Salt 'n' Pepa - Push it
• Vanilla Ice - Ice Ice Baby
• Inner Circle - Bad Boys
• KLF - 3AM Eternal
• Massive Attack - Unfinished Sympathy
• Nirvana - Smells Like Teen Spirit
• Jane's Addiction - Been Caught Stealing
• Poison - Every rose has it's Thorn
• Guns 'n' Roses - Sweet Child o' Mine
• Smashing Pumpkins - Today
• NWA - F*** Tha Police
• NWA - 100 Miles And Runnnin'
• Snoop Doggy Dogg - Gin N'Juice
• Snoop Doggy Dogg - Ain't no Fun
• Warren G - Regulate
• Fugees - Killing me Softly
• Coolio - Gangsta's Paradise
• Public Enemy - Rebel without a Pause
• The Stone Roses - Fools Gold
• Happy Mondays - Step On
• The Verve - Bittersweet Symphony
• Radiohead - Creep

As to whether or not it will be released as box set in the vein of the Vice City soundtrack boxset, I would imagine yes. This came up on the IGN nSiders forum a while back, in which someone "in the know" (READ: BestBuy stockboy) claimed to have seen a product listing from Sony Records about a San Andreas soundtrack set. Take that with a grain of salt, however. Seeking cohesive information from IGN is like going to an Adam Sandler film for some deep, subtle wit.

Re:About the soundtrack...

[MrHanky]

Terrible. One of the reasons I enjoyed GTA: VC so much was because of the soundtrack. And I enjoyed the soundtrack not because I actually want to listen to that kind of music, but because it fits the style of gameplay, and because I'm no longer fed up with it. Hey, I can actually enjoy listening to A Flock of Seagulls or Duran Duran because it reminds me of GTA now. The nostalgia of the music fits the gameplay.

90's music is just too close. The music turns real -- it's no longer just music that is played in the game, it's music that you actually could be listening to yourself. And much of that music (Vanilla Ice?!) just sucks too much. Fugees make me sick. The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony was a perhaps a catchy song, but most people should be tired of it now. Only Jane's Addiction and Guns 'n' Roses fit the gameplay (alright, I'm not really into hip hop, so I don't recall the NWA songs).

I still think they should have gone with the 70's.

Re:About the soundtrack...

[mr_sas]

trust me..nwa's lyrics will fit right in with gta gameplay

Re:About the soundtrack...

[MC Negro]

Speaking of NWA, Ryder, the main character's homeboy, bears a striking resemblance to the late Eazy-E (of NWA fame), down to the Locs and the jerry-curl.

In any event, we can all breathe a little easier knowing that countless white suburbanites will be singing the liberating song of civil rights that is "Fuck Tha Police", thanks to its place on the soundtrack. Yay.

Re:About the soundtrack...

[metamatic]

It's not so much that the 90s are too close, as that the stuff that they've chosen seems to be almost entirely hip-hop and related genres. I guess I'm gonna be turning off the soundtrack and replacing it with my own 90s selection.

Or maybe it's just rumor, and there will actually be a 90s electronica radio channel. I can hope.

Re:About the soundtrack...

[gr0ngb0t]

maybe it's just rumor, and there will actually be a 90s electronica radio channel

Given they've listed about 20 tracks, and in VC there was what... 8 radio stations that played music - you'd have to assume that there's more music on the way. I'm holding my judgement on the music until I see a bigger list.

Too Violent For Me

[Blakey Rat]

I really don't enjoy playing Grand Theft Auto games because they're too violent... because of this, I kept wondering what made the games so compelling that they were these huge uber-best-sellers.

Then I got a copy of Simpsons: Hit and Run, which is basically the exact same play-style as GTA games, but without any violence. Now I get it, it's pretty damned fun, very forgiving if you fail a mission, and really easy to just pick up and play even if you only have a few minutes.

Re:Too Violent For Me

[Babbster]

No violence in Simpsons: Hit and Run? I kick little Ralph Wiggum all over the place in that game. Watching him roll into traffic cracks me up....Wow, I need help, and fast.

Re:Too Violent For Me

[linzeal]

Too bad that makes almost all the missions in the game race missions which make the game lack the defining mutability of the GTA games.

Re:Too Violent For Me

[incubusnb]

Violence in games is great, it prevents me from getting out my aggressions on other people, instead i can enter a little game world where the inhabitants are life-less and face-less and i can slaughter to my hearts content, then when i'm done i can go outside and hug a stanger.

the problem isn't the violence, the problem is the fact that most parents don't take the time to properly explain to their child the difference between games, movies and reality

Re:Too Violent For Me

[kisrael]

Then I got a copy of Simpsons: Hit and Run, which is basically the exact same play-style as GTA games, but without any violence

Well, I do kind of get a kick out of the violence, but it's not the violence alone that makes Simpsons fall flat for me...the game just doesn't have the depths of things to do. GTA really hit a sweet spot between cartoony and realistic in terms of its driving and what not, and S H+R just lacks that.

Re:Too Violent For Me

[Lisandro]

I really don't enjoy playing Grand Theft Auto games because they're too violent... because of this, I kept wondering what made the games so compelling that they were these huge uber-best-sellers.

Maybe is just that. Violence sells, in videogames and every other form of enterteinment.

Re:Too Violent For Me

[obeythefist]

There are a lot of violent computer games, and they don't all sell as well as GTA.

Why then is GTA successful? It's related to the violence, but it's more about freedom. Violence is a potential side effect of freedom. In many games, you won't be allowed to just go this way, shoot that person, steal this car, run over that pedestrian.

If players were prevented from acting and viewing the consequences of their actions, the game would lose its appeal. But because the computer lets you get away with whatever you intend to do, the player feels in complete control and the sense of immersion, the pure escapism takes hold - no "artificial" barriers to get in your way.

Rockstar is one the ball.

[xtacyhonx]

As a company, Rockstar is smart to release San Andreas on the same graphics engine and gameplay style. Going along with the "If it aint broken, dont fix it" theroy has proven successful in the past/present (Tony Hawk anyone)? The game play in that game has been virtually identical, with some added tricks. I expect San Andreas to be no different. I own both GTA3 and GTA:VC, and aside for some different moves and cars, the gameplay and graphics are exactly the same. And seeing how again, PS2 will be the flagship base for release, this wont change much (although expect it to be ported to PC and possibly XBox in the near future). If you liked the original GTA3/VC games, you'll probably play this too, just don't expect any changes to graphics or gameplay. Of course, if you didnt like the gameplay, you wouldn't be aquiring this game now would you :)

Re:Rockstar is one the ball.

[kisrael]

I'm hoping you're right friend, but I'm really worried Rockstar might be blowing it: While completing missions and visiting the different locales in a city will all work toward helping you to become the man in GTA: San Andreas, your actions will also help build CJ up via an RPG-like system in the game. For example, shooting guns will gradually increase CJ's weapon skills, thus making him more and more accurate

One of the coolest things about 3 and VC were how your character wasn't different at the end as he was at the begining. Maybe you had the armor and/or health bonus, you had more cash, and you either had weapons or knew where to get some good hardware. That was it. It made for a tremendous pick up and play game, you didn't much care what savegame you were at, beause YOU WERE ALWAYS THE SAME GUY.

But this crap? I don't want to worry about this junk. I just want to get through and see the game, working on my own skills as a player, not my player's skill witihin the game.

This really, really annoys me. Msybe they'll pull it off, and I hope so, but I think in trying to make the game "deeper" they may screw it up for the casual players...GTA:VC was one of the few 1-player "party" games I had just 'cause it was so fun for a N00B to pick up and play, and made for great public viewing...

Re:Rockstar is one the ball.

[obeythefist]

That's a pretty sudden and ill informed decision - in Vice City and GTA3, your ability to sprint is entirely dependant on the amount of time you spend sprinting. The more you sprint, the fitter you become, and the longer you can sprint for.

You're assuming that this will be a complete RPG conversion - I doubt that. I think the differences will be barely noticeable, every bit as subtle as the "training" in GTA3 and VC.

Likewise, at the end of Vice City, when you own every property, and sit at 200 health and 200 armour and every car you drive has double armour, you can run without tiring and every house you have has a huge range of weapons - you're not the same guy, not by a long shot.

Re:Rockstar is one the ball.

[kisrael]

Which decision?

I hope it's that subtle, but when they talk about the learning new combat moves and what not, keeping buff in the gym and eatin' right...I dunno. Even if it's far short of a complete RPG conversion it could be annoying.

For most people, the end of Vice City might be owning every property, playing every mission, and getting the health-150 and armor-150. Run w/o tiring, being fireproof, all those other things are very hard to get. An armoury at each house speeds things up, but you could still get decent weapons once you knew where to go. (also, by the time you unlock everything, you've probably played thhrough the missions, so it's just stuff you have around 'for fun'...)

How about some realism?

[Chemisor]

So when will GTA get realistic events like parking tickets, license revocation for reckless driving, and hordes of lawyers that would descend upon you should you as much as scratch the paint on another car?

Re:How about some realism?

[bairy]

(UK joke)

Don't forget the congestion charge

Nice new features

[rDx666]

First, the BMX bike. I like how Rockstar lets you do stunts with the bike and lets you go fast--making cars less relevant and thus making gameplay more varied. And damn--three different CITIES? with highways conneting them? San Andreas is going to be a boatload of depth.


The new carjacking scheme probably will piss off some people, but I think it's a case of realism building on, not detracting from, gameplay. When I played Vice City it was always too easy to get a really nice car, and it took out the sense of reward that you filched a good ride from someone by taking the right opportunities.

And even if the engine is the same, they have added mroe polygonal complexity, which should satisfy the graphics crowd. Though I don't know how the PS2 is going to handle the added draw stress. The lighting system also distances San Andreas from the previous two games.

But I'm off-put by the gym stuff: Your character should be able to work up his strength primarily by actual fighting (especially with the new personal combat system). Please, let's not have someone mashing a button for 30 minutes and consider that a workout. Insert joke here.

Sims Theft Auto?

[Anonymous Coward]

You have to eat to keep up energy levels, workout to keep fit, what's the point of all this? What else will they add, pets to keep your character happy? Maybe add jobs and marriages, decorations for your house.

Oh ya! And maybe you can steal cars and stuff if they still have time before christmas to add it in...

Poor GFX will adversely effect the gameplay

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor GFX will adversely effect the gameplay

Had R*North looked at the recent competition (Notably DRIV3R, True Crime and Enter the Matrix) they would be aware that gameplay without GFX to match is worthless. If they fail to get that balance right again, they could be looking at a disaster.

R*North need to move with the times, develop technology and make everything great, not just the Goodfella's/Casino styled gameplay.

Save your money kids, go buy a copy of DRIV3R, True Crime or Enter the Matrix.

Re:Poor GFX will adversely effect the gameplay

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not quite sure what you are saying to say, as Driver3 (also known as steaming pile of crap 3), True Crime (also known as piss poor copy of GTA), oh and Enter the Matrix (also known as how to screw up a really great licensce).

But not one of those games hold a candle to the GTA series

Re:Poor GFX will adversely effect the gameplay

[obeythefist]

I think that guy was a troll :)