DBturbo Posted October 7, 2007 Share Posted October 7, 2007 Don't you think it was a bad idea setting LCS before gta 3 only because they made LCS beter than gta 3 by adding stuf in like new fences, bikes and the ferries. They should of made 2 years after instead so they could new and better changes in then. The same goes for VCS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor Posted October 7, 2007 Share Posted October 7, 2007 Yea, it's like the cities have been downgraded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas. Posted October 7, 2007 Share Posted October 7, 2007 Don't worry about it being in the past. It shows you what happened up towards the events of GTAIII. I personally would like it in the future but the past is better than Present/Future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrLlamaLlama Posted October 7, 2007 Share Posted October 7, 2007 I'd rather find out what happened in the past, than in the future... A sequel doesn't give us as many answers as a prequel does. (Well, depend on the game scenario, but for this example, a prequel was better) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surrealistic ArtSweet Posted October 8, 2007 Share Posted October 8, 2007 that's what we call a trademark buddy, it's original from R*, the ability of finding a good story, even if it's not making any sense . VCS is also set before 1986, and it worked out allright, even though some things are just weird for being there 2 years ago, and dissapear 2 years later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfLiberty Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 (edited) I love the fact, that each GTA after GTA III is set before. It makes it more interesting I think. I like looking into the past of some of the characters. For every GTA to have taken place after III, it just wouldn't be possible. For it to be possible there would have to have a 2-3 gap between each, and the time setting would become vastly boring. IMO I reckon VC wouldn't be as much of a favourite if it was set in 2002 (1 year after the events of GTA III) and SA being set in 2004. Setting them in the past is good, because I think what makes every GTA special is their "Style" and "Theme". Although it is funny how Tommy could own properties in 1986, and Claude couldn't buy anything else, bar guns in 2001. lol I know you were specifically talking about LCS, but I just wanted to rave on about GTA in general. hehehe Edited October 10, 2007 by Johnny Fidalgo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 (edited) Lol, if Tommy Vercetti turned up in GTA III time to kill Claude, he would be old. Tommy: "Ken, pass me my cane!" Ken: "Right here Tommy!!" Claude: *Sigh* Edited October 10, 2007 by Connor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rashon. Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Lol, if Tommy Vercetti turned up in GTA III time to kill Claude, he would be old.Tommy: "Ken, pass me my cane!" Ken: "Right here Tommy!!" Claude: *Sigh* Not that old. Tommy would be only 50. He could still be a killer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike356 Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 yeah but he wouldent be able to do it as good and hed be a lot slower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBturbo Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 Lol, if Tommy Vercetti turned up in GTA III time to kill Claude, he would be old.Tommy: "Ken, pass me my cane!" Ken: "Right here Tommy!!" Claude: *Sigh* Not that old. Tommy would be only 50. He could still be a killer. Her i can just see tommy at the age of 50 he'd probably break his back though.LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Tommy looks around 35/40 in GTA VC, and GTA 3 is set like 25 years after I think.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rashon. Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Tommy looks around 35/40 in GTA VC, and GTA 3 is set like 25 years after I think.. Vice City was set in 1986 and Tommy was 35. GTA III is set in 2001 so he'd be 50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connor Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 I suck at maths.. I couldn't be bothered counting half way through that post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbanoutlaw Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 When I was a younger man, I worked at a small town Co-op. We had an old guy running around who kept up w/ me just fine. He was 86 at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfLiberty Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Yeah just because someone is old, doesn't mean they're slow and fragile. Besides 50 isn't what I would call old. Tommy could still be a badass, even if he was in his 70s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urbanoutlaw Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I'm in my '40s & had no problem fracturing my hand punching a hardwood door frame. 107-year-old solid oak = stronger than human hand, just in case you didn't know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonOfLiberty Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 I'm in my '40s & had no problem fracturing my hand punching a hardwood door frame.107-year-old solid oak = stronger than human hand, just in case you didn't know that. The real question remains, what the hell were you punching a door frame for? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostatend Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 its just like starwars each one happens earlier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts