Tendo City

Full Version: new GTA game
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Quote:No specific details as yet, but recent investor reportings from Take-Two have confirmed that the PS2 will be blessed with another Grand Theft Auto sequel later this year. Another unknown GTA game is also in development, apparently.

Whether one of these mysterious Rockstar developments will include the much conjectured GTA: Sin City (Las Vegas styled) or GTA: San Andreas, is at this point a chimera.

In the same report Take-Two also revealed sequels for Max Payne, Spec Ops, State of Emergency, and Smugglers Run. The next eighteen months will also introduce us to a new Serious Sam game on the PC, Railroad Tycoon and Hidden and Dangerous sequels, as well as a version of Mafia on the PS2 and Xbox.

More on all the most interesting of these releases as we get it.

Just about all the games they are making are sequels...
Well when you have a franchise that sells around ten billion copies within the first hour of its release, you want to make plenty of sequels. Let's just hope it doesn't become another Tomb Raider.
"Just about all"? Um, all of the games mentioned in that quote are sequels... sequels or ports. Does Take Two plan on making any new games this year?
Well, I assumed they were making other games besides those mentioned, but that list might be it.
Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!! Body Harvest 2!!

One can wish, right?
I take it you enjoyed the first one?
Yes. I love the whole ride-whatever-you-want-wherever-you-want-to gameplay. It's why I like GTA and Battlefield 1942 so much.
...what surprises me is that, people seem to have a problem about GTA or TR having sequels, but then they don't have a damn problem about ongoing sequels on Mario, Zelda, Final Fantasy, Pokemon, Sonic, Tekken...etc. So please tell me, how different are GTA and TR??
Well, Mario at least totally changes it's gameplay now and again, last time being with SM64, before that they had SMB2, which then went back to the old style with SMB3, but it was heavily expanded on the original. Zelda pretty much kept the same style except for Adventure of Link, though they all bring something new to the table. Final Fantasy has a different battle system each game. Pokémon, well it's a fun enough game that it's second and third iteration are fine. You know, really Pokémon has only "rehashed" twice, it's just that it's got like 3 or so versions each sequal... Sonic and Mega Man haven't added too much except moves (8 new moves for Mega Man at the very least each new game for instance), but they are fun enough types of games that you really only want expansions on the same concept.

I'll say this Existance. (I hereby refuse to use whatever FuSoYa style capatalization you insist on when refering to you, it's just too much.) Most of those franchises you listed DO get flack for being redundant. I've heard most of them insulted for lack of creativity at one time or another.
Quote:Originally posted by eXisTenZe
...what surprises me is that, people seem to have a problem about GTA or TR having sequels, but then they don't have a damn problem about ongoing sequels on Mario, Zelda, Final Fantasy, Pokemon, Sonic, Tekken...etc. So please tell me, how different are GTA and TR??


People do complain about that, just not very much here. And anyway there is a difference between sequels and milking a series.

GTA: 2 PS2 games with 2 more on the way.
Mario: 1 GC game with one known on the way.
Zelda: 1 GC game with two possibly on the way.
Final Fantasy: 2 PS2 games with 1 on the way and 1 GC game on the way.
Sonic: 2 games this generation.
Tekken: 2 PS2 games.

Notice the difference here?
I have no problem at all with sequels as long as the gameplay is still good... like Mega Man games -- I still find them a lot of fun and don't mind so little change...

Mario? There haven't been many true Mario games... 2 3d platformers in the last 6 1/2 years... and the last true new Mario sidescroller came out in 1993 or so (SML2 on GB)... so that one's out. Zelda has kept changing too... and usually, but not not always, for the better.

I don't get why people say those games have so many sequels when Mario clearly hasn't in recent years and Zelda has some similar gameplay but enough changes in each one to clearly make them different...

Anyway, sequels are fine as long as the gameplay is still fun... the problem is when it isn't. Like Tomb Raider... that game was awful from the beginning and I'm happy that its kind of gone away now... stupid game...
Quote:Originally posted by Great Rumbler
People do complain about that, just not very much here. And anyway there is a difference between sequels and milking a series.

GTA: 2 PS2 games with 2 more on the way.
Mario: 1 GC game with one known on the way.
Zelda: 1 GC game with two possibly on the way.
Final Fantasy: 2 PS2 games with 1 on the way and 1 GC game on the way.
Sonic: 2 games this generation.
Tekken: 2 PS2 games.

Notice the difference here?

Yeah, I do notice the difference. When it comes to the PS2's favor, they whine.... :)

Mario? C'mon, There hasn't been much of a difference (for me personally) between Mario 64 and Mario Sunshine. You just go running around in 3D la-la land. Tell you what? The only way Shigeru Miyamoto-sama can make Mario become in a very completely varied way is the way how Nintendo made Super Mario RPG on the SNES. Although I have never played it, it totally blew me away when I saw its become a turn-based role-playing.
Quote:Originally posted by Dark Jaguar
I'll say this Existance. (I hereby refuse to use whatever FuSoYa style capatalization you insist on when refering to you, it's just too much.)


You not only refused to use the odd capitalization, but you MIS-SPELLED HIS NAME. That's disrespect.

Quote:Originally posted by A Black Falcon
Mario? There haven't been many true Mario games... 2 3d platformers in the last 6 1/2 years... and the last true new Mario sidescroller came out in 1993 or so (SML2 on GB)... so that one's out. Zelda has kept changing too... and usually, but not not always, for the better.

You used a double negative and now I'm confused!

Quote:Originally posted by eXisTenZe
Mario? C'mon, There hasn't been much of a difference (for me personally) between Mario 64 and Mario Sunshine. You just go running around in 3D la-la land. Tell you what? The only way Shigeru Miyamoto-sama can make Mario become in a very completely varied way is the way how Nintendo made Super Mario RPG on the SNES. Although I have never played it, it totally blew me away when I saw its become a turn-based role-playing.


Not only are you crazy and uninformed; "SAMA" is NOT an appropriate title for a man the calibur of Miyamoto!!!
Shi-chan!!
Quote:Originally posted by A Black Falcon
I have no problem at all with sequels as long as the gameplay is still good... like Mega Man games -- I still find them a lot of fun and don't mind so little change...

Mario? There haven't been many true Mario games... 2 3d platformers in the last 6 1/2 years... and the last true new Mario sidescroller came out in 1993 or so (SML2 on GB)... so that one's out. Zelda has kept changing too... and usually, but not not always, for the better.

I don't get why people say those games have so many sequels when Mario clearly hasn't in recent years and Zelda has some similar gameplay but enough changes in each one to clearly make them different...

Anyway, sequels are fine as long as the gameplay is still fun... the problem is when it isn't. Like Tomb Raider... that game was awful from the beginning and I'm happy that its kind of gone away now... stupid game...


Yoshi's Island was the last true 2D Mario game, whether you want to acknowledge it or not (the title is Mario World 2). They just changed everything so drastically that you don't want to accept it as a Mario game. But it is a true Mario game, since it was a platformer where you controlled Mario (in a way).
Quote:Not only are you crazy and uninformed; "SAMA" is NOT an appropriate title for a man the calibur of Miyamoto!!!

You're just gonna have to forgive me on that, cause' I'm not a hardcore loyalist like yourself.... (Yu Suzuki-sama toutemo desu.)
..
Quote:Originally posted by eXisTenZe
You're just gonna have to forgive me on that, cause' I'm not a hardcore loyalist like yourself


Nai michi.
J'aime pisser en mon potage! vous? Ahahahahaha!
Yoshi's Island is a very good platformer... but its just not a Mario platform game in the classic 2d series sense. Its good... but it doesn't belong in the list.

Like Donkey Kong '94 for GB -- its a great game that has platform action in it and stars Mario, but is a puzzle game, not a platformer, so SML2 is the real last 2d Mario game.
What?? Yoshi's Island is a 2D platformer just like Mario World; it just plays differently. It's also the best 2D Mario platformer ever made.
If Yoshi's Island is a platformer, so is Wario Land... after all, it says "Super Mario Land 3" in the title... Erm

The name isn't the point here... both those games used "Mario" to sell but aren't Mario games. Like the first Wario game or Yoshi's Island... while Wario 2-4 dropped the "SML" title, and Yoshi's Story dropped the "Mario" title. They are platformers, but not Mario games.
You still control Mario in the game. But not in Wario Land.
No you don't... you control Yoshi...

You control Mario in that game the same way you do his hat in Mario 64 -- if it falls off go get it.... thats it.
You control Yoshi but you also have to control Mario so that he doesn't fall off. Does it matter? It's a Mario game.
Its a Mario game, but not a Mario game thats in the main platformer series.

As I said, like Yoshi's Story or Wario Land 1-4...

or Mario Tennis pr Mario Kart or something.
Nonsense.
Mario can be controlled, control via super stars from Star Haven! Haven above and near and within Star Road! GENO WAS RIGHT ABOUT US!
Quote:Does it matter?


Not that I can tell.