The problem with the rumour this morning that Grand Theft Auto V will be set in Hollywood is that, in general terms at least, we’ve already been there. Not that I’m disputing the details of the rumour because I’ve no reason to – there’s every chance the next ‘Auto could well be set in Los Angeles’ most celebrated locale even though this is the first we’ve heard of it.
However, as some of the comments in our post this morning can attest, a fair chunk of Los Santos in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas was already based (however loosely) on Hollywood.
Vinewood, as Rockstar dubbed the subset of the first island, incorporated the famous sign; Vinewood Strip with the theatre and other tourist attractions; a Chinese area and the Walk of Fame.
The thing is, though, that unless Rockstar are going to go down the same route as they did with Grand Theft Auto IV (and Liberty City) expanding on what’s there and building much more in and amongst what they’ve already made in San Andreas, Vinewood’s going to be a pretty small place. Hollywood’s ripe for the picking, though, not least in terms of the mileage the developers could get just focusing on the movie industry.
There’s plenty more around and about Hollywood, though – Beachwood Canyon, Melrose Hill, Cahuenga Pass – with over 200,000 people living in the district, and landmarks are numerous: the Hollywood Bowl, Kodak Theatre, Ripley’s Believe It Or Not for starters and that’s in addition to the areas already riffed in San Andreas: Sunset Strip, the Sign, etc.
And then there’s the hugely exciting prospect of Rockstar expanding their scope, if indeed they are going down this line, to cover more of LA. Could we see a return to the areas already seen in San Andreas just as we did with Liberty City in GTA IV? We’re assuming if they do go down this route a lot of the open space would be condensed somewhat, but that wouldn’t matter one iota.
And as to the validity of the rumours themselves? Well, it appears some people are happy to read between the lines, citing the film poster and the seagull theatre as Hollywood based themes. And the erection volcano? That’s meant to be a penis parody (vine, wood). And the volcano poster’s location in the sex shop? Again, that’ll be Hollywood’s border with the San Fernando Valley.
Of course, Vinewood itself was referenced several times in Grand Theft Auto IV (and at least once in Chinatown Wars) so Rockstar at least never let go… Could it work, then – GTA Hollywood? Yes, and with Rockstar on form after the sublime Red Dead Redemption we’ve every faith in the developers, especially based on the enjoyable and cleverly put-together expansion packs for the last main Grand Theft Auto.
Time, as ever, will tell, and all this talk just makes me want to boot up San Andreas again and go for a big long bike ride!
tonycawley
I agree that a lot of rock* games are the same as each other, red dead redemption, as much as i think it’s a cracking game, really is just Gta wild west, in fact they should’ve just called it that. Still, just because the gameplay mechanics are the same, doesn’t mean the game is the same. A lot depends on the location, characters and story. You could say all driving games are the same, or all fps are the same, which in essence they are, but made different by graphics, location, story, characters etc.
GodDarnKat
How about a game set in the freezing wastelands of the arctic…
Grand Theft Skidoo
thedriffter50
Why the bashing of San Andreas ? Considering it makes most ps3 games and GTA IV look like a joke because it raised the bar so high.
I can’t see why people love Vice City as much as it was good. All Rstar did was slap a overrated 80’s setting, add a few bikes and you get Vice City. Vice City was the smallest jump in the entire series.
San Andreas set the bar so high that its ruined gaming for me that I expect the same amount of stuff to do as San Andreas.
cc_star
Cool, my opinion of GTA SA was that it was boring, it expanded into all the wrong areas.
I’d loved GTA, GTA II, GTA London 1969, GTA III and absolutely loved GTA Vice City before it, but San Andreas was lots of space filled with very little, the new gameplay mechanics were way off the mark, the whole fitness thing and other elements may have looked good in the planning stage but were boring to play.
Vice City hit the perfect sweet spot between scope, size, gameplay and importantly fun
yoza123hughes
i think Rockstar will go straight to San Andreas missing Vice City because of the time it takes to develop a map with the detail of Liberty City. Remember the delays? We havent even had a official release of any details. Think this game will probably be out in about 2012/13, so i’m not getting excited. Yet.