Jump to content

Base for server realism.


TakeTwo

Recommended Posts

@liq The issue is that you're going to roleplay things that never happened IG while the server was a thing just because roleplaying a separate, additional state is too weird for you or something. This greatly undermines any effect characters can have on the actual lore, particularly in politics.

Edited by arrdef
Link to comment
1 minute ago, arrdef said:

The issue is that you're going to roleplay things that never happened IG while the server was a thing just because roleplaying a separate state is too weird for you or something. This greatly undermines any effect characters can have on the actual lore, particularly in politics.

Declan made a point on the last page. Every inch of this map is designed off of California. Let me give you an example: we've got lore cars. You're not going to tell me it's called a Ford in California and a Stanier in San Andreas in IC text. The same way you're not going to say literally the same state exists but we're an island and have a beaver on the same flag when it's San Andreas.

 

Again.

 

We're meant to portray California. Not mimic it. Nobody could care less what really happens in California. Why? Because it sets little to no precedent here unless you take it into account in IC events and you make more and more people aware that they need to role-play that.

 

What do you even try to prove? All of the gangs on this community base themselves off of Los Angeles gang culture, specially SoCal. It's so far up that SoCal is dubbed SoSan in game. It's the same for politics and events of large magnitude.

 

Tomayto, tomahto. Tbh you think too much about it. Just apply a suspension of disbelief to anything that doesn't fit. All I'm telling you is nobody will take your seriously when you're going to tell them, "yeah dude, shit's crazy out in Cali ... I actually came from Cali." or anything on an IC basis.

 

e0c84126da10cdf5d8482f14a1bca9ea.png

Edited by liq
Link to comment
Just now, arrdef said:

The issue is that you're going to roleplay things that never happened IG while the server was a thing just because roleplaying a separate state is too weird for you or something. This greatly undermines any effect characters can have on the actual lore, particularly in politics.

But then you have the issue of having two very similar-looking states, with similar gangs, with similar organizations with similar histories. How do you justify that?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

You're mimicking California if you rail-road San Andreas' history to follow the exact same path going forward. That's my entire point. And you're also preventing any meaningful roleplay like major shootings, or elections that could elect a republican mayor / governor.

 

The notion of "suspension of disbelief" is equally valid to address concerns about 2 similar states existing. There are 2 Dakotas.

Edited by arrdef
Link to comment
12 minutes ago, bartman said:

it does bring up a bit of an interesting conundrum. If California still exists, does Liberty City exist or New York City, or both? Miami or Vice City?

I don't really think there's a "right" or "wrong" answer, but it is interesting to think about.

This...

 

I share the opinion that there is no right or wrong answer. It's just..picking which to follow so it can be portrayed consistently and to what degree. What I'd like to see in this case would be having a decision made by management (?) when certain important things come into conflict. Such as things that law enforcement should be ticketing etc.

 

Which is where my suggestion comes in:

 

Could a thread where people put up questions when there are inconsistencies in things on the server where the admin team/management can give a definite answer? This way a reference could be created for things on an as needed basis.

 

Thoughts on this suggestion?

Edited by TakeTwo
Link to comment
Just now, TakeTwo said:

This...

 

I share the opinion that there is no right or wrong answer. It's just..picking which to follow so it can be portrayed consistently and to what degree. What I'd like to see in this case would be having a decision made by management (?) when certain important things come into conflict. Such as things that law enforcement should be ticketing etc.

 

Which is where my suggestion comes in.

Legally, it's been clarified that we do not follow California laws.

 

But I believe the main debate here is whether San Andreas exists with California still existing or replaces California.

-

 

Edited by bartman
Link to comment

@arrdef

 

What are you even on about with "any meaningful roleplay like major shootings [...]" and "This greatly undermines any effect characters can have on the actual lore [...)"?

 

What meaningful role-play and effect characters can have on the actual lore are you referring to? You want to make a character that's going to be Rodney King or a knock-off of to justify the events behind it, or you're trying to be Newsom and run for Governor? It makes no sense, dude. We'll role-play our own state with regard to the established lore and the real life history applicable to it. Nothing's stopping no one to try to become mayor or governor on a Republican platform when there's elections, and if they win, then so be it.

 

Do you really know what the Rockstar lore is, if not "mimicking" (although I've been tell you for three pages that we're portraying, not trying to mimic, but you choose not to read)? It's Carl Johnson and Grove Street Families fighting the Ballas and Officer Tennpenny being the culprit of the IC riots. Then it's three stooges taking on the state and whacking FIB, IAA, and any criminal enterprise in between in GTA 5's story. It makes no sense. We of course need to use the real life history in San Andreas.

Edited by liq
Link to comment
Just now, bartman said:

Legally, it's been long clarified that we do not follow California laws.

 

But I believe the main debate here is whether San Andreas exists with California still existing or replaces California.

-

 

Actually the point of this thread is what we should be using as a baseline for referencing things that there isn't already a SA specific reference on the forums for. 

Edited by TakeTwo
Link to comment
Just now, TakeTwo said:

 

Actually the point of this thread is what we should be using as a baseline for referencing things that there isn't an SA specific reference on the forums for. 

Generally, if that's the point you're after then afaik from that thread I linked if it's not in writing as a San Andreas law, we default to U.S Federal law, not california law.

 

As for general like...pop culture references? I guess just kinda wing it? Does J-Lo live in vinewood instead of hollywood? Discuss lol.

Edited by bartman
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...