Jump to content

Officially define SA as it's own State from CA


Brett

Recommended Posts

I definitely do see your point. And I gotta say, it's a good one! I still do disagree, though, for this simple reason:

I think we should be RPing in the GTA world(heh pun) and not our world. The GTA world is not our world, it's a different universe, it's in many ways a shared universe too, it just has a few critical differences; the geography, the state borders, the names, all that. 

 

If we're talking about IRL, yeah, I wouldn't be okay with moving Las Vegas. But we don't have to move Las Vegas, because in the GTA world, Las Venturas just isn't in Nevada, that simple. 

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, Brett said:

Okay, then counter question. Would you support completely eradicating Las Vegas from Nevada, since Las Venturas is an SA city based on Las Vegas? If we're going to follow this argument, then we need to be consistent. Would you be fine with wiping out Las Vegas/Las Venturas from the State of Nevada and place it in the State of California, even though they're copies of each other? @CloutToken

 

Or how do you propose to resolve that one? 

I'm not supporting for California to exist, so no, however, considering Las Venturas isn't previewed in any GTA game apart from GTA SA which is in another universe, it has never been truly announced if Las Venturas has it's own state or not in the HD Universe. To me personally, I don't really mind where it's put, considering it isn't in our game or universe (unless Rockstar makes a future game set there), and it wouldn't affect us much, however, San Andreas could always be an option considering it was there in GTA SA, but having it in it's own fictional state (or just Nevada) would work as well.

Edited by CloutToken
Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Hugh-Gi-Oh said:

I definitely do see your point. And I gotta say, it's a good one! I still do disagree, though, for this simple reason:

I think we should be RPing in the GTA world(heh pun) and not our world. The GTA world is not our world, it's a different universe, it's in many ways a shared universe too, it just has a few critical differences; the geography, the state borders, the names, all that. 

 

If we're talking about IRL, yeah, I wouldn't be okay with moving Las Vegas. But we don't have to move Las Vegas, because in the GTA world, Las Venturas just isn't in Nevada, that simple. 

I completely appreciate the reasonableness in the conversation, even though we still may disagree in points, I cannot thank you enough for that. As for your point here, I agree we should be roleplaying in the GTA world and that it should be rather separate in a way. But the truth is, we're not going to be banning people from roleplaying being from other parts of the US or even foreign countries, as we can't. And that opens the door for people to keep claiming they're from New York City, Miami, Vice City, Liberty City, Detroit, Carcer City, etc and we do need to come to some reasonable conclusion on what truly can be considered to exist vs what is not. Even though as we know and acknowledged, they are similar, although different. 

 

The reason I talk about moving Las Vegas, is because the line of argument I was getting was the idea of just replacing the IRL cities like Miami straight into Vice City, New York City into Liberty City, and so on and just RP them as such. Which if that were the case, then we would have to RP Las Vegas as Las Venturas as that's what it's based on, but that's IRL in Nevada and not California. And since GTA lore places it in the State of SA, we'd effectively for this to be consistent have to rip LV out of Nevada into SA just for us to remain consistent if this is the line of logic we're following, leaving Nevada with a loss of over like 60% of the State population lol. At least with this suggestion, it allows for them all to exist separately and still allow the full choice of roleplaying where people want to roleplay being from. Are there still issues with it since a lot of it is based on something real, sure. Is it something I believe we should really use to stop the general concept, probably not. But that's just my opinion.

 

3 minutes ago, CloutToken said:

I'm not supporting for California to exist, so no, however, considering Las Venturas isn't previewed in any GTA game apart from GTA SA which is in another universe, it has never been truly announced if Las Venturas has it's own state or not in the HD Universe. To me personally, I don't really mind where it's put, considering it isn't in our game or universe (unless Rockstar makes a future game set there), and it wouldn't affect us much, however, San Andreas could always be an option considering it was there in GTA SA, but having it in it's own fictional state (or just Nevada) would work as well.

Then that would confuse people a bit more, suddenly placing it in Nevada if before it was made for SA, and I don't think that would particularly go over well at least in my opinion as that would be pretty confusing to be like Miami is Vice City in Florida, New York City is Liberty City in the State of Liberty (New York), but Las Venturas which should be an State of SA town is apparently in the US State of Nevada, completely separate. Even Red County apparently exists in the HD universe as mentioned by this;

 

Quote

Red County also exists in some form in the HD Universe since it is mentioned in Grand Theft Auto IV and the CB radio of semi trucks in Grand Theft Auto V.

Yet we only can see Blaine County and Los Santos, when before we knew Red County to be directly north of Los Santos in the 3D Universe. There won't be a clean way to resolve these issues, hence why I believe the suggestion I put forward is the most moderate course. Just allow people to roleplay where they want to be from, while also having the fictional versions along-side. Otherwise, you have to seriously start picking and choosing which lore is right and what to drop, and that can cause a lot more confusion. 

Link to comment
13 minutes ago, Brett said:

I completely appreciate the reasonableness in the conversation, even though we still may disagree in points, I cannot thank you enough for that. As for your point here, I agree we should be roleplaying in the GTA world and that it should be rather separate in a way. But the truth is, we're not going to be banning people from roleplaying being from other parts of the US or even foreign countries, as we can't. And that opens the door for people to keep claiming they're from New York City, Miami, Vice City, Liberty City, Detroit, Carcer City, etc and we do need to come to some reasonable conclusion on what truly can be considered to exist vs what is not. Even though as we know and acknowledged, they are similar, although different. 

 

The reason I talk about moving Las Vegas, is because the line of argument I was getting was the idea of just replacing the IRL cities like Miami straight into Vice City, New York City into Liberty City, and so on and just RP them as such. Which if that were the case, then we would have to RP Las Vegas as Las Venturas as that's what it's based on, but that's IRL in Nevada and not California. And since GTA lore places it in the State of SA, we'd effectively for this to be consistent have to rip LV out of Nevada into SA just for us to remain consistent if this is the line of logic we're following, leaving Nevada with a loss of over like 60% of the State population lol. At least with this suggestion, it allows for them all to exist separately and still allow the full choice of roleplaying where people want to roleplay being from. Are there still issues with it since a lot of it is based on something real, sure. Is it something I believe we should really use to stop the general concept, probably not. But that's just my opinion.

 

Then that would confuse people a bit more, suddenly placing it in Nevada if before it was made for SA, and I don't think that would particularly go over well at least in my opinion as that would be pretty confusing to be like Miami is Vice City in Florida, New York City is Liberty City in the State of Liberty (New York), but Las Venturas which should be an State of SA town is apparently in the US State of Nevada, completely separate. Even Red County apparently exists in the HD universe as mentioned by this;

 

Yet we only can see Blaine County and Los Santos, when before we knew Red County to be directly north of Los Santos in the 3D Universe. There won't be a clean way to resolve these issues, hence why I believe the suggestion I put forward is the most moderate course. Just allow people to roleplay where they want to be from, while also having the fictional versions along-side. Otherwise, you have to seriously start picking and choosing which lore is right and what to drop, and that can cause a lot more confusion. 

Like I said, it's not as big of a deal to me as LA and California is. That can be decided by the continuity team making all of this, however, it should be one or the other. Liberty City shouldn't co-exist with New York and San Fierro shouldn't co-exist with San Francisco. My point earlier was that Los Santos and Los Angeles can't possibly co-exist with how similar they are in terms of history, architecture, logos, and illegal organizations.

Link to comment

LS == LA.

LSFD == LAFD

LSPD == LAPD

etc

 

It makes absolutely no sense to have 54 states from a realism perspective. Especially states that look almost identical, just smaller.

 

LS literally is LA in the GTA universe. There is absolutely no way to realistically justify it not being LA. As for LV and SF, they can remain Vegas and Francisco as Venturas and Fierro aren’t part of GTA 5.

Link to comment

Okay not gonna write a whole lot of text here, but what about characters that are from San Diego, Bakersfield or Fresno?

 

To the people that argue SA is a replacement of California, then what happened to those cities? They are not in San Andreas, but they are in California. Are we supposed to delete them from existence?

Edited by Pruto
Link to comment
40 minutes ago, Pruto said:

Okay not gonna write a whole lot of text here, but what about characters that are from San Diego, Bakersfield or Fresno?

 

To the people that argue SA is a replacement of California, then what happened to those cities? They are not in San Andreas, but they are in California. Are we supposed to delete them from existence?

That points to an earlier thing I referenced. The GTA V worldspace isn't all of San Andreas, it's just Southern San Andreas. https://gta.fandom.com/wiki/State_of_San_Andreas_(HD_Universe) Personally, I assume that everything outside of these counties that HASN'T previously been established in the GTA Universe is up to the player to decide on. So, the rest of San Andreas can, in my opinion, encompass San Diego, Bakersfield, etc. Basically: as long as GTA Universe Lore doesn't directly contradict it, go ham. In my opinion.

 

 

EDIT:

@Brett I just wanna point out that I can't give likes anymore today, but if I could, your last post deserved a like from me. You make some very good points that are hard to argue against, even though I still do believe that removing LA and the like from our universe is the best option. 

Edited by Hugh-Gi-Oh
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I absolutely agree with a few points here. Los Angeles simply cannot exist in the same world. Even looking at a purely historical standpoint, we've got the same architecture, landmarks, shared history, culture, poverty issues and general geography (like the point regarding Del Perro). Having an uncodified lore opens the door to completely contradictory player-based, poorly thought, lore.

 

I believe a best case scenario is realising our world is much different to the real world and to keep our expectations as such, moreso like a parallel universe in which there's a lot the same, but a lot of difference too, for example, there's probably still a Brexit in the UK and a Trump in the White House. But there's also a Los Santos and a Liberty City, the economy is vastly different and the vehicle manufacturers are completely different. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment

I don't want to mingle too much into the topic since it's quite the debate. Valid points are being brought up by both sides of the spectrum but I believe we should go with what the HD universe has to offer and keep it at that. I don't see the need in overcomplicating this too much and making a large universe with pieces and bits taken from all kinds of areas. I do agree that we should not be mentioning LA IC due to Los Santos indeed being a carbon copy of it. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to have two cities that are pretty much alike, it's rather awkward for me to play around that. 

 

I'm curious to see what steps management will take to explore this topic and what they do with it but I am more than certain that they make the right decision.

Link to comment

Just to add my own opinion into the mix: I'm heavily more inclined to see the server take the lore that the HD universe has to offer rather than trying to fabricate their own or acknowledge that L.S and L.A exist concurrently and all the other aforementioned duplicates. Like @HaveADream said: a parallel universe. In my opinion, I just think that would be the easier and more straightforward route to take, plus the HD universe has some cool lore even if some of it's a bit ridiculous but that just adds to its flavor. 

I disagree with OP but it's not a bad suggestion and certainly one I'd like to see over others I could think of. However, I'd prefer seeing far more cues from the lore GTA has and RPing in a universe wherein Los Angeles doesn't exist but Los Santos does. 

Link to comment
  • mj2002 locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...