Adriaan

Just like to update this and say that this person have indeed used his own name with the company address alongside it as the registrant of Rockstar-related domains. For instance, when GTAIV.com was transfered over from its previous owner to Rockstar, it had his name. Other domains in the past have also had his name. As for the part where it's not parked on Take-Two's own servers... well Take-Two have had several domains parked on other web servers, which they then later transfer (or not transfer) to the Take-Two servers. So chances are this domain name IS IN FACT owned by Take-Two. They're just trying to hide it from people (like me) who'll find the domain names if they would to add it to their own servers. I'm pretty sure there are a ton of domain names, such as love-meet.net, that's parked all over the web. Even though it's just a numeral name (GTA 5), don't make much of it just yet... Take-Two is known to securing A TON of domain names related to their IPs.

That's not what I meant, but ok...

Credit your sources perhaps? http://www.gta4.net/news/3901/eye-vee-no-more/

*comment removed after news article was edited*

They released the assets a while ago... Chris can get them from me or Jordan. Just grab them from GTAF would be the best.

You do have to remember that the engine that render the game is not final, and so also for the vehicles. I know of at least one that was shown in the trailer that still had stuff to be done on it. About the "demo glitch", that is an interesting one. I don't think it's much of a glitch, and there is actually a slight chance they released that screenshot to so many magazines and online sites on purpose. I mean, they obviously look through the screens before sending them out, and you spot that clearly within 2 seconds. The guy on the left is likely Niko, and they could've gotten out of that car, climbed on top of the bridge, activated the free-aim camera and took a shot. So yeah, could be that they wanted fans to speculate you can even climb that good... Niko perhaps a former gymnast ?

Isn't the information in Play just what they took from other magazines / the web? I don't see how this can be worth posting. We already know an option on the mobile phone is a camera, so that was just a pretty easy assumption of them, as is the text messages one. Also, we have heard numerous times that Niko is in thousand of dollars in debt, as is that info on pedestrians, which EVERY preview talked about, though I see you took that down now.

Nothing, it has NOTHING to do with this. I was only referring to you who had many negative comments about GTAnet. No, not directly to me, but in another conversation with someone else. I hate to go in this direction in topics... but I always want to explain myself... ERGH.... Now, leave it. Chris knows what you had to say about GTAnet, and he even asked you to stop it because since then you left a negative impact about THegtaplace on GTAnet. If I were Chris I would've hated you... because of how you make this great site that I used to work with look bad.

Barnaby said he didn't have time to write for this issue. Please get your facts straight (simply just reading the topic) before posting something like that. You obviously know what I'm talking about regarding GTAnet. We've been talking about it in recent weeks, I have transcripts of your conversations of what you had to say about the website.

Honestly, dude, if someone would to start a magazine or website covering a video game publisher (in this case Rockstar Games) they will NOT be stealing your "idea". And OF COURSE I can judge someone else's work. I understand why the quality went down in this issue, because Barnaby didn't write content for it. The previous ones were MUCH MUCH better than this. If anyone is going all mad about someone else's work it's you who said many, many bad things about GTAnet in the past.

Wow..... now that was VERY bad. This is not a personal attack to anyone, but the actual magazine was bad. Whoever wrote it has a poor understanding of the GTA community and covering the games as well. A fan made rumor is not worth publishing. Oh and if you didn't know yet, the guy actually admitted it was all made up. Might want to mention that in your next issue. I actually understand this video more than I do this issue... http://youtube.com/watch?v=wVz_v8GxhMs Now, as far as the actual content goes, I think you need to look into making a magazine covering everything Rockstar Games. End result will either be a good magazine worth reading or something for us to laugh about.

EDIT on 21 April, 2007: This news article was edited, the post below was written when the original entry was up. Original Post on 20 April, 2007:Wow Chris I never thought you'd post this article, at least not like this. Obviously the landmarks seen in the trailer aren't that far apart as they are in real life, even the Hearst Tower is moved a lot closer to Times Square. If they had to do the same thing with San Andreas and Vice City they'd come up with huge maps...