Don't get it? GTA 1 2 were on the PS1. GTA 3 was on PS2 followed by:
Vice City (GTA4)
San Andreas (GTA5)
Shouldn't the next new game be GTA VI (6)?
Don't get it? GTA 1 2 were on the PS1. GTA 3 was on PS2 followed by:
Vice City (GTA4)
San Andreas (GTA5)
Shouldn't the next new game be GTA VI (6)?
They looked at "3" as a total reinvention of the series -- and it was. This is the same approach they've taken with the new one -- hence "4". Vice and San Andreas were kinda expansions to the "3" formula.
That in addition to the fact that very few quality games have "5" or "6" in their title. The public often becomes jaded by sequalitis (is that a word? eh, it is now). Rockstar undoubtebly is aware of this. "4" just sounds better.
If the other games had roman numerals after them, then yes.
Thus far, each numerical suffix has represented a drastic change in the series.
GTA was basic overhead
GTA 2 was more detailed and had more involvement
GTA III was the first foray into 3D
GTA: VC, SA, LBS and VCS were offshoots of III
GTA IV is all new.
Going by your figuring, technically GTA IV would really be GTA VIII (8) since there were those other games too.
As those above me stated, the only real sequels have been the roman numeral ones. The rest are side stories within that particular number game. Vice and San Andreas for PS2 are the same as London was for PS1.
Considering how good IV is looking, I wouldn't be surprised if it too has 2 spin-offs in this generation.
In fact, considering the dev. cycle nowadays, I wouldn't be surprised if you only see 1 true sequel per generation now (i.e. the real GTA V won't be until XBox 720 / PS4)
I do give props to Rockstar for keeping the same engine off-shoots attached to their respective numerical versions. The PlayStation library has a nightmarish amount of game series that couldn't figure out where they wanted to stay in the canon of the series (example, Blood Omen: Legacy series, the Fisherman's Bait series, even the original need for speed never got a "4"...they all became subtitled games).
Can you imagine if it was the other way around? We'd all be playing Super Mario 35 and Sims XXVII ;D
Also, I bet many "mainstream" gamers never played GTA until the third one. For a lot of people GTA IV will actually be the fourth GTA (III, VC, SA, IV).
Exactly right. If Capcom had released something like Super Street Fighter 2 under the name Street Fighter 3, that wouldn't have been a good idea.
Some of those GTA games which followed up number 3 have pretty much the same gameplay, same graphics and everything. All that changes is one or two features, the soundtrack and the location. So if Vice City or San Andreas had been called 4 or 5, a lot of people wouldn't have accepted them as true sequels. Fans of the series would have been a little underwhelmed instead of just enjoying those games for what they are and that is simply yearly updates. Leaving those post-GTA 3 titles as separate games is the smarter thing to do. It was a decent question, though.
That's not very true at all. The engine has received significant upgrades between Grand Theft Auto and Vice City Stories and the gameplay gained a fair bit of depth in that time span as well (especially in San Andreas).
quick edit - I like that they're officially calling it GTA IV and hope they do stick with the generational numbering system. It's a pretty snazzy concept.
Last edited by roushimsx; 04-19-2007 at 08:30 PM.
GTA
GTA II
GTA: London 1961
GTA: London 1969
GTA (GBA)
GTA II (GBC)
GTA II (DC)
GTA: Directors Cut
GTA III
Vice City
San Andreas
Libertity City Stories
Vice City Stories
(Liberty City Stories PS2)
(Vice City Stories PS2)
GTA IV
Makes sense to me, i don't see the issue. Obviously four comes next in the sequence.
(Holy crap, there are a hell of a lot more GTA's out there then i thought)
Last edited by ProgrammingAce; 04-19-2007 at 11:15 PM.
I played GTA 2 in 2000 on PC which a friend got for me and I was hooked on it. After many hours of playing I decided to try out GTA and although the graphics were a step back (as expected) it still had great gameplay and vehicles the 2nd dropped (super bike comes to mind ). When GTA III came out I felt as though it was a step back in the series and wasn't impressed. Of course others totally played the game to death I just never got into it, however GTA 4 might look like I'm ready for the 3D perspective to the series and it's real eyecandy. *waits for the PC release*
[Website] [Gallary] [Games List] [DP Feedback]
So the "true" titles of the other games are:
GT3 - Liberty City
GT3 - Vice City
GT3 - San Andreas, and so on.
How is GT4 going to be "revolutionary" versus the previous GT3 series?
Well, no, because I don't consider portable games to be part of the "main" series. They are more like sidequests. Like Final Fantasy Legends for Gameboy are not part of the console series.
It's a pretty simple explanation...
GTAIII took place in 2001 - all of the subsequent games took place before that (ie, 1987 for Vice City) and would be considered prequels. GTAIV takes place in 2007 and is thus the first true sequel.
"How is GT4 going to be "revolutionary" versus the previous GT3 series?"
Judging from what little real info has been released, it seems like the big change is that the mission/story structure is going to be a lot less linear.