Thats one of the areas where i think the devs thought they were dealing with kids. This kind of nonsensical player progression blocking is outdated. Ok, the bridge exploded. Convenient, but understandable. But they overdid it with the tunnel and the subway. Blocking off everything that could lead to the other locales was dumb. Very dumb.Phias wrote:I found it strange that Vice City was an island in the middle of the ocean... it felt pretty isolated. And also, it's unrealistic and quite stupid to make us believe that the city could be completely blocked off by road blocks, since that would trap everyone there, like a quarantine...
If at least blocking player progression wasn't so simplified it could've been better tolerated. They could've placed some workers around the bridge, some construction machinery, for instance.
Can't wait to beat prostitutes during an earthquakeSan Andreas _does_ seem like a good place to end the series(as it was the last city in GTA1) though.
![icon_dance :dance:](./images/smilies/icon_dance.gif)
I think they managed to whip up some interesting missions in Vice City. Photographing the corrupt senator, saving Love Fist from the car bomb, intimidating people (juries, guy in the golf course, warning shop owners in the mall), All Hands on Deck, Cop Land, Cap the Collector, Keep you Friends Close..., and the bank job, were all very good. I also liked GTA3's mission of killing the witness (the guy being transported in that solid cast).I just hope they remember the series` roots and keep the missions interesting and fun, like the original game's were. I could die over and over again, and I'd still be having fun.
It would rock in the 70's. Literally.Anyway, I'm just glad the new GTA will take place currently instead of in the 80s or the 70s. I didn't like the theme too much, but it was interesting for a while.
![icon_joy :joy:](./images/smilies/icon_joy.gif)