Talk:Grand Theft Auto IV/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 →

Contents

Archived Page

I've archived the page as it was getting long and the discussions going on were getting hostile and not productive to the article. --BillPP (talk|contribs) 20:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Yay! --70.128.115.70 00:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I copied a few unanswered comments from that archive page back to here, as they might still be relevant for discussion. --70.128.115.70 01:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for catching those! --BillPP (talk|contribs) 14:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

DATE

Someone has edited the date, taking the European and American release dates as being the same when they're NOT. I'm reverting it back. --Jiei 17:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you add a source for that? The official site only mentions the 16th. Rafert 14:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Take 2 sues Jack Thompson

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/13027/Take-Two-Strikes-Back-Sues-Jack-Thompson/ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.116.92.202 (talk) 18:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--Vaz9jW054


thnis might get him off R* lol--Butterrum 04:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

PS3 with episode??

R* did not conform this it was a source that conformed this but not R* or R* North so its not a fact also R* and Peter Moore both stated that it was EXCLUSIVE for the XBOX 360 and is avalible after a month on Xbox Live market so the info about the PS3 is false untill R* SAYS SO not some magizine--Butterrum 21:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Innit though. 212.219.57.126 12:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

GTA 4 Fansites?

There is no section for fansites. There are a lot of them out there but here are some that i know about

www.gta4.net www.gta4.tv www.gta-ireland.com www.gtagaming.com

ect

I would also like to say that the above poster doesn't know what he is talking about. The Source that the magazine cited was from someone within Rockstar North... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.110.158.249 (talk) 13:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

According to the Wikipedia guideline on links (WP:NOT#LINK), articles really should just limit the links to fansites to the most important/notable one(s). Also as the game isn't out yet all the fansites will be adding to the article is the same information there is here and some un-sourced speculation. I think we can wait until the game is out for when fansites provide information and the higher level of detail that's not put in Wikipedia before adding one. That's my opinion on the section. --BillPP (talk|contribs) 14:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
What he saidYeanold Viskersenn 17:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Ditto. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 18:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

ok this is not pokemon hes right those are links to real deals from R* north yeah R* north is in Ireland for all i know GTA IV chould be Scottish *gasp* lol well i dont know that for shure lol but i was thinking sceance Manhunt was a ticket to what stuff was gonna be in GTASA is Manhunt 2 gonna be a ticket i hope so Manhunts a good way to know whats up--Butterrum 16:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you should read a dictionary definition of what "ditto" means before you try to throw an insult. Moving on, like Bill said, only very notable fansites of extreme merit will be added, if any exist, not just some plain fansites that, by the way, are not from Rockstar. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 17:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


i know what it means im not listening to you ok for all i mknow Bill chould be your puppet--Butterrum 17:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope you're not accusing me of being a sockpuppet because that's pretty insulting. I've been contributing to Wikipedia for a long while now, I've started a wikiproject, received a barnstar award and added some high resolution free images. If you are suggesting I'm just a sockpuppet despite my contributions then you really need to read up on these policies WP:DICK, WP:NPA, WP:AGF. I'm pleased with what I've contributed to Wikipedia and implying that I'm a puppet is to imply that I'm not the person who made these contributions. Please think before you make a comment like that, because even saying I could be a sockpuppet is insulting to me. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 18:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
In an attempt to return to the subject, I still second the vote to only add notable fan sites, if any appear; all "run of the mill" sites will be removed. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 21:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


whbat are you talking about i get insulted all the time and i dont care how many awards you won you chould be him --Butterrum 02:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Page Protection

The page is semi-protected. --70.142.47.196 02:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 02:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm asking why. There is no mention of it. :) --70.142.47.196 02:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Ooooh, ok. Well, you didn't use a question mark so I was confused. I guess IP vandalism got out of hand. I haven't been paying close enough attention lately. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 03:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok. --64.149.37.117 14:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Image deletion

  • I know this has gone through all the correct procedures and deleted, and this isn't the right place to discuss it - but it seems so, so petty. There is no free alternative to the image, it accurately depicted the subject in question (the announcement of GTA IV episodic content on the 360) and was correctly sourced. I can't believe, in any scope of my wildest imagination that either Microsoft OR Rockstar would have ANY problem with such a blatant publicity-oriented photograph being placed in such a high profile position on the net. Would they really cause a pointless PR disaster for themselves by suing a famous non-profit organisation in order to REDUCE their own publicity? It's absolute nonsense - but them's the rules, even though the rules are, for want of a better word, silly. I find that pedantic destructive editing like this, targetting blatantly good faith edits and removing countless hours of honest work for the sake of red tape is extremely offputting for me as an editor and I'm sure it has been the cause of the loss of a good few editors in the past. But them's the rules... Yeanold Viskersenn 16:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Personally I would have chosen to keep the image. I also believe that it wouldn't be breaking the Wikipedia fair use policies by keeping it too. I didnt see the fair use rantionale on the actual image, but here's what I would have used:
Non-free / fair use media rationale - NEEDS ARTICLE NAME
Description

Peter Moore announcing GTA 4 for the Xbox 360 platform.
Source

Microsoft publicity webpage. (if online, a link would go here)
Article

[[{{{Article}}}]]
Portion used

A single image from an article.
Low resolution?

Low resolution, unchanged from original (if it hasn't been resized)
Purpose of use

To illustrate the completely unique way of announcing a video game release.
Replaceable?

No free image available.
Other information This image is necessary due to the uniqueness of the method of announcement. As (to my knowledge) this method has never been used in the past, it may be necessary to illustrate it to clarify exactly what happened.
The only other concern to me would be whether or not the image (and the event it describes) is notable enough to include in the article. I believe it is as it's a unique announcement of the first next-gen GTA game. But like you said, it's all happened now and there's not much that can be done. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 18:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
One more thing, the fact that the site specifically says no other use is kind of off putting though. I don't know where fair use comes into that kind of situation. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 18:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I have no knowlegde of the processes of uploading images and whatnot, but I also feel that would, and probably should, have been more successful in asserting the necessity of using the image for the article since, apparently, the rationale that was used didn't suffice. But that's just my 2 cents. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 18:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
The image was deleted by consensus and YES it's unfree out of context and blantant publicity. if youre a Microsoft Fanboy and loves Peter Moore arms, Wikipedia isn't the right place to show your proudness. --Ciao 90 15:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
That last sentence was unnecessary and inflammatory. Nobody here said anything that seemed to qualify them as a "fanboy". We were just discussing the fair use rationale. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 15:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I was merely pointing out that Bill's rationale suggestion would have possibly asserted the image's existence; to tell you the truth, I'm pretty impartial to whether it stayed or not, but it wasn't hurting anything, was it? And, if you're just a blatant dick, then Wikipedia isn't the place to be unnecessarily mean, if it's not too bold to say. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 15:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
This discussion should probably be closed; I have a bad feeling more people are going to come and spark unnecessary conflict. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 15:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, and even though not much can be done at this point, at least 3 editors have gone on record to just say how they disagree with the decision. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 19:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

A question for those ignorant a**holes who edit this.

a have a few issues about the correctness of this article and I would like to discuss them...

first: how do you know that THE "IV" logo is "Official" ? from where do you know that? few weeks ago everybody thougt that the old "Grand Theft Auto" logo was "Official". so how do you know that? the fact that its posted on some count down site does not mean sh*t.

second: the flag notifications are not tolerant against Canada because USA is not the only country in north america and since there is no united north american flag there should not be any flags.

third: the "Media" should be "unknown" because for PS3 the media will be only the blu-ray and DVD will not be equal thats why the logic conclusion is that HD-DVD will be the media for the xbox 360 release

so if you are from R* and know these facts please write everthing properly and if you dont know DONT EDIT THIS ARTICLE I know that people will delete this what i just wrote but still... think-it-through OK? ---Chegis 20:34 march 23, 2007 (UTC)

I recently reverted back to the 4 Logo so I'll answer about that. It's official because it's taken from the official rockstar website. That doesn't mean it will definitely be used on the game cover, it just means that it's not unofficial, it was made/commissioned by the owners of GTA4. Also, try not to call other editors ignorant assholes, assume good faith that editors are only trying to make the article better. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 20:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I am an editor too and by posting this i have made myself a asshole wich i am. but you are not better than i am. ok that answered my question about the logo. but how about the media and thoes flags? ---Chegis 20:55 march 23, 2007 (UTC)
Regarding your comments:
  • The "IV" logo has been up for a while, and its the logo on the official site, so it can be considered official until something new comes along (like from the trailer next Thursday)
  • Put a canada flag along with the US flag if you want
  • All PS3 games are on Blu-Ray, all Xbox 360 games are on DVD. Xbox 360 does not support HD-DVD games
Also take a look at WP:NPA and WP:AGF —cmsJustin (talk|contribs) 20:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
actualy it does/could support HD-DVD games. [[1]] ---Chegis 21:09, march 23 2007 (UTC)
It could possibly, but from your link: The drive is able to play HD DVD movies, but all Xbox 360 games will continue to use DVD-9 media. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 21:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

FX

Anyone else seen the ad on FX. It shows the countdown, and it's actually counting down. Perhaps, someone could find more info about it and put it on the page? 71.75.161.147 06:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes i saw that, amd when i wnet to sleep i left it on that channel, but when i woke up at Seven it had been replaced with an infomercial --User:Atomic Religione]

I have heard of that too, it only lasted an hour or so. Maybe you should search one of the fansites for it, surely it is adressed there in more detail. - Redmess 15:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

"Controversy" section should be renamed

I think calling it "Controversy" overplays it- this section should just be retitled "Jack Thompson" or some such to indicate that it's just him who is making any noise about GTA IV at this moment. If some other prominent organization or politician jumps on the GTA IV-bashing bandwagon, then it can be more renamed and more accurately called a "controversy". -albrozdude 04:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree; "Jack Thompson controversy" or something to that effect will suffice more, as of right now at least. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 04:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
All the previous GTAs (III and Vice City) contain a "Controversy" heading. Although Jack Thompson is the only one involved in the current discussion regarding this installment, it is unlikely that no other individuals or organizations will voice their opinion regarding either the content or distribution. IdoAlphaOmega 03:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Website crashed

I think it should maybe be added to the trailer section that at 22:00 UTC the trailer was not shown as the website crashed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.109.124.29 (talk) 22:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC).

It's really set in Liberty City as the article now claims? EntityHavoc 22:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea, seeing as no one managed to see the trailer before it crashed.--86.151.137.245 22:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

The trailer doesn't exist. Rockstars pulled an april fools on you all. I saw the countdown reach 0.--Luigifan13 22:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I've managed to get to the page asking me for my age, and some of my friends apparently have an outline of a video player but the video won't load. EntityHavoc 22:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


I saw it hit 0 too, and got to an age confirmation page. When I put that in the player came up, but nothing was loading. It also had an option to download the trailer in multiple formats, including HD WMV. --ParalysedBeaver 22:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I've got to the video page now. Hopefully it will work soon, it seems to be getting better over time. EntityHavoc 22:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

the countdown was set to read your system clock, i set my clock forward and got redirected, slowiy i was seing 404 errors replaed with content pages, my assumption is too many people are waiting for this and constantly hitting f5 and the server cant cope. 84.65.106.116 22:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes I saw the trailer right after the GTAIV site hit 00 00 00, that crashed but Gametrailers.com showed the trailer for a few seconds before their site got F*d. it basically shows a guy who has some sort of russian accent talking about how he has killed,smuggled people and how hopefully it will be better in this new city. there is a ship that says "liberty city' on it, thats shows while the dialogue is refering to smuggling so who knows where its set, if the ship if from LC or if its just pulled in from LC The Ravager 22:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Try this link, its the trailer from an xbox site. http://movies.teamxbox.com/xbox360/gta4/gta4_3291hd.wmv

New York City? No.

Resolved. Many landmarks in the trailer make obvious references to Liberty City; see the below list as well

A few things in the trailer show the words "Liberty City". For instance, the ship at the shipping yard says "PLATYPUS// LIBERTY CITY". (Nbmatt 22:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC))

It's obviously a parody of New York though. EntityHavoc 22:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Platypus - they just signifies the ship is from LC, not that it's in LC. There is nothing there to say it is LC, or 'obviously a parody' of NY. I would argue it is in fact a facsimile of New York. Dan Kerins 23:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

On one of the signs during the "Times Square" scene it says "Welcome to Liberty City" ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 23:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Given the nature of the recent trailer it is obvious that the game will be taking place in a city modeled almost identically to modern New York City. For this reason I think it is safe to compare the game's version of New York City (Liberty City) to the real thing. DigitalisAkujin 01:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

This is most definitely Liberty City. I don't know the specific street or street name, but in one of the opening sequences to the trailer, you can clearly see a near exact replica of the street leading up to Marco's Bistro in the original Liberty City from Grand Theft Auto III. At least, I believe it is -- it certainly tipped me off to assume it was Liberty City the first time I watched the trailer. ~~

Nothing about the trailer suggests that this takes place in Liberty City. Liberty City as depicted in the GTA III series has none of the landmarks featured. The Brooklyn Bridge, the Statue of Liberty, the Flatiron Building, the Empire State Building - that's NYC, my friends. Liberty City was entirely different physically and geographically and borrowed only from New York in style and influence. The city depicted here is a relatively accurate re-creation of New York, and none of the landmarks or street scenes shown appear in the GTA universe's Liberty City. The only possibility that this is Liberty City is that the Rockstar people are starting the IV series off from scratch and completely scrapping the universe of the III series, favoring more real-to-life representations of actual cities than merely stylized ones. But there's not nearly enough information in the trailer to definitively say that. Until more info comes out, the game's setting should be identified as New York or an unnamed city that bears a striking resemblance to New York.

- I think its quite obvious that they've gone for a more realistic representation of NY this time, but are still calling it Liberty City. Everything points to it being NY, but everything points to it being Liberty City, and knowing GTA, it just simply makes more sense that they would call it Liberty City. My first argument would be the GetaLife building, by the time you've filled a city with fake names like that, you may as well have renamed the city and called it your own. BTW, did anyone notice if the WTC was gone? Like is this set post-9/11? Vality 11:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

In the trailer you can clearly see signs that say "Welcome to Liberty City" and "I *heart* Liberty City". It's in a New York style because since day one Liberty City has been based on NYC. Look at the map for Liberty City in GTA and an aerial photo of NYC, it's the same shape. There's more in the trailer to indicate that it's not NYC and is infact Liberty City, the landmarks don't count because there was landmarks in SA (Transamerica building, Hoover dam etc.). ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 13:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Liberty City is New York City--Butterrum 15:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

from the gta4 website:

Even though New York City was already the setting for Grand Theft Auto 3, it is said that the Liberty City of GTA 3 did not bear much resemblance to New York. ... The aim of the original Grand Theft Auto was to depict life in America as seen by the British (hence all the crazy stereotypes) and so it makes sense for all the games in the series to be set in America. And what better place to do it than New York - one of the world's capitals, and arguably the biggest symbol of America. ... A game set in New York wouldn't be complete without all of New York's landmarks. GTA IV will feature the Statue of Liberty, the Empire State Building, the Chrysler Building, the MetLife building (renamed by Rockstar's comedians to GetALife), Times Square and St. Patrick's Cathedral. All of the landmarks that we have confirmed so far, are from the GTA 4 screenshots that we have at our disposal.

They are blatantly saying that it is not liberty city it is NYC. http://www.gta4.net/setting/index.php 63.165.176.75 17:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

in the trailer theres a I love Liberty cITY SIGN AND welcome to Liberty City it is Liberty City ive seen NYC it looks just like it but GTA4s version of Liberty City looks more and alot and exactly like NYC--Butterrum 17:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's Liberty City. No GTA ever made has been set in a real city. They mention real cities, of course, but they are not the settings. They were merely stating it will resemble NYC moreso than it did in GTA III. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 18:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Uh, actually, I'm pretty sure London is a real city. OnikageWolf 23:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, outside of them 2, which were pretty early and in another "era", so to speak. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 20:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Just to add to this conversation a little, I would just like to list the following things that would indicate that this is Liberty City, not New York City, even if it looks like New York City. (Which is what Liberty City was always based on, anyway.)
  • At the ferry terminal, it says "Liberty (something, presumably ferry)" on the side of the ferry.
  • It reads "LIBERTEEN" on the side of a building.
  • A sign on the side of a building says, "Welcome to Liberty City".
  • Above that, another sign says "Liberty Tree" (also seen in previous games).
  • On the other side of the same building, a sign says "I (heart) Liberty City".
  • The cargo ship Platypus has "Liberty City" under its name. Yes, it could mean that it's merely from Liberty City and visiting New York City, but would this also mean that New Yorkers have suddenly decided to declare their love for Liberty City in signs or call their ferry "Liberty Ferry"? I suppose it's possible, but wouldn't that be just a little bit unlikely?
I'd say that Occam's Razor dictates that it's hell of a lot more likely that guys who've created a game with a fictional city based on New York City are also setting the sequel in that city instead of setting it in New York City but still peppering it with references to the fictional city -- especially as various fictional brand names from their previous games, such as Liberty Tree, Sprunk, Clucking Bell and Kronos are prominently displayed.
But of course, this is all just speculation! We don't know, and Rockstar ain't saying. -- Captain Disdain 18:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Both sides of the police cars in the trailer are reading "LCPD", so it can't be New York City. It doesn't matter how the city has changed its appearance since LCS, Liberty City is Liberty City ProSieben 19:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Exactly. Issue resolved. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 21:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

IF we have landmarks such as Statue of Liberty, the Empire State Building, The Coney Island's Ciclone. Therefore the game takes place at New York City. Any taught that the game will take place any where else its just a dumb act of jealousy of some nerd from any where else —Preceding unsigned comment added by Claumazzoni (talk • contribs)

Liberty City is a fictionalised New York - so you are effectively right, but it won't be called New York City in the game. Yeanold Viskersenn 17:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Also, I can assure you that they will not be called by their real life counterparts' names, as are many other landmarks in the GTA locations. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 17:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


This is for sure Liberty City. The first shot is Saint Marks in Portand, the train that runs around the island. The second scene shows the rollercoaster, but its on the western side of Portland, where there was nothing in the previous games. The next scene shows the area where the construction site is in Staunton Island in GTA III, in Liberty City Stories it was some stores, houses and an opera house like shown here. Then the ferry terminal and downtown with new buildings. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zg11 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC).
The issue is resolved, so further posts aren't necessary. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 03:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Size of Map

In the last shot showing what appears to be the Brooklyn Bridge, what looks like the Empire State Building looks like it is only a few blocks away. In real life, the bridge is almost at the south end of the island, and the building is at 35th, which would mean that if Liberty City were an approximate scale map of NYC, 40 odd blocks would be compressed into 2 or 3, which would make the entire island not very big. Thoughts? (maybe they havent let on to the fact that you can play the entire country...) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 165.123.231.53 (talk) 01:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

Liberty City is not an approximate scale map of NYC (whatever that means), just like Vice City and Los Santos they are just imaginative representations of RL cities. Los Santos includes well-known buildings from other cities besides Los Angeles. But yeah, I'm doubting that after San Andreas the next big GTA is going to now limit you to just one city. I expect the next trailers to show other areas. --64.149.33.224 02:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at the clip where you see the train. To the left there is a sign saying: Vice City $300. Woopsie, we got ourselves both LC and VC in this game, possibly. And who knows, maybe they will actually include lots and lots of places? LC, VC, SA, even a remake of London? We won't know until a new trailer, or the game itself, is released.--213.89.192.200 20:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

YouTube link

You can freely add my video upload, I think I was the first one to upload it on YouTube, or at least the one that people have started linking to. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlF6fbIFiCM Also, don't forget that there's gametrailers.com etc.. so, please, give some links to the readers. --88.193.241.224 22:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

LA Noire

LA Noire is a completely different game set in the 40's in LA, whoever put that it's GTA IV obviously hasnt seen the real trailer which is set in New York —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KAZAAM (talk • contribs) 23:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC). --Kazaam 23:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

no Liberty City witch is based off and is NYC except for the name--Butterrum 15:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Animals

Is it worth mentioning that seagulls are visible several times throughout the trailer? Granted there were birds in San Andreas ( buzzards in the Bone County area ), but these appear to be far different. No interaction is shown, but they do make noise, and seem to have more complicated flight-patterns and such, not to mention actual animation, whereas I don't believe any animation was given to any animals in GTA before this.

Not really, that's verging on original research. If information comes about that there's a significant difference with the animals then whatever sourced information available should go in, but at the moment it's just speculation n I think it doesn't belong. In my opinion this is just an advance of the technology making the game seem more realistic rather than anything notable. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 00:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess not. But still, even this level of realism when it came to wild-life was never present in previous Grand Theft Auto titles, and it seems kind of note-worthy that they beefed up the entire system overall to include animals. Though I'm guessing we can rule out deer, bears, and so on, due to the locale in which the game is going to take place. 12.107.247.112 02:51, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

This is the first time animals to that detail have been put in the GTA series, we can expect dogs and cats I would think. And rats. That is original speculation, but in a description of the trailer, mentioning birds seems fair enough JayKeaton 03:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

dogs and cats maybe the rats 100% with u there aafter all its Liberty City--Butterrum 15:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

"IV" Logo

Alright, there's already some discussion on this. But is there some specific reason why the "IV" Logo was deleted/is unavailable? It was on the countdown website, it was on Rockstar's television advertisements, it was in the trailer. All signs point to it being the game's official logo at the moment. The article infobox is begging for an image and I can't think of a better graphic than the game's logo. Pele Merengue 23:52, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Oot, there it is. Nevermind then. Pele Merengue 00:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Eastern European, or Turkic?

The presumable main character is indeed an immigrant from a Slavic or Middle Eastern country, but given his facial features isn't there a possibility that he's not Eastern European? Just wondering. 70.43.138.74 00:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

He definitely appears Eastern European to me overall, although I agree his facial appearance is slightly ambigious. However "an immigrant with a heavy Russian accent" is original research and needs to be cited or removed. - 85.210.11.39 02:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

He looks and sounds like a true-born Russian, to me, though that is only a guess at this point. But even when the game comes out, how much more will we be able to say? The only reason we said Carl was black was because -- well, his skin was black. I doubt R* thinks anyone cares enough to mention his specific European descent in the game other than in passing ( say he used the word "motherland" in the context of referring to his old home ). But yeah, it shouldn't say he's Russian until we have a source for that. 12.107.247.112 02:49, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Let's just wait for a source; all this speculation could create warring. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 02:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

He sounds Turkish/Iranian to me. --Looskuh 10:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I think he's a Gipsy --- Chegis 12:03, 30 march 2007 (UTC)
Like I said, this conversation is irrelevant unless you all have sources. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 15:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

and i still think hes Russian he looks Russain and he said in the trailer he sells people or somthing like that and human Trafficking is the hugest and most done crime in Russia and he dosent need to say motherland to be in Russia his accent is simalar to a Russian--Butterrum 17:55, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

You can't base his nationality off of his crimes; Asia has a big human trafficking problem too, so, using that logic, I could say he's Asian. Anyways, I'm only saying it one more time: please stop the speculation, or I'll remove the discussion. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 17:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Y'know everyone here besides you is basically just saying "this is my personal opinion, but let's wait and see". If anything is contributing to the possibility of warring it's you acting like you have authority over what others can discuss (besides irrelevant chatter - which this isn't) and threatening to delete comments (which someone would just revert anyway). - 85.210.11.39 21:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

On another note, I noticed "Russian" was changed to "Eastern European"; makes sense to me but still needs a source or it's original research, if anyone knows of an article on where they make note of the accent then please add it as a citation. - 85.210.11.39 21:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

too right, this dude seems to have taken it upon himself to be the admin of this page, personally i think if anyones views should be removed its Klptyzm as he is the reason behind any irllevent chatter.

Hmm, is that right? Perhaps you all need to acquaint yourselves to the page on talk page guidelines before you try to gang up on someone. Giving unconstructive personal opinions don't help jack crap. I might be actin' like a dick (which, due to recent events, I truly don't give a shit about right now), but, that being said, my actions are sanctioned by a policy, and I will continue to remove "irllevent" discussions. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 22:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
It isn't just Klptyzm. Anyone who has any respect for Wikipedia policy realises that this discussion shouldn't be taking place, and that includes me. I am with him on this. J Milburn 10:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

GUYS GUYS GUYS i mthought mwe were here to talk about the Russian guy not Klp he isnt in the game so lets stop talking about him yes Klp is annoying and thinks hes King but ignore him when he dose just keep on talking about the Russian guy ok OK RUSSAIN GUY not Klp ok you hear me by the way Klp i have to talk to you on your talk page about somthing important--Butterrum 06:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Please don't talk about the Russian guy, since you have no more information than anyone else about who he really is. --70.234.44.60 07:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Can we please remove the Jack Thompson section?

I hate it, it has nothing to do with GTA IV and why is there a whole section in this article? Please, someone take it out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Caffolote (talk • contribs) 03:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

Why does it bother you so much? ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 03:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
It's a noteworthy controversy. I imagine it could be better-sourced, however. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)r
i agree with Caffolote it should be put in the Video game controversy article or something. it just seems like non-news.

Spelling error

"similar cinematic sytle to Godfrey Reggio's" sytle should be style —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.160.65.14 (talk) 03:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

You dont actually have to discuss spelling errors here. Please be bold and go fix it. No one will kill you for fixing a spelling error without asking. - Redmess 15:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Original research

While I agree that some of the things edited into the article since the trailer's debut were somewhat speculative and original, I honestly don't see the harm in mentioning cold hard factual things seen in the trailer in a kind of trivia section, such as the Liberty City welcome sign and boat insignia. Pointing out things that are obvious in the trailer and having no speculation about them should be perfectly legal. If this violates some kind of rule, that rule is stupid beyond belief. I can see how a claim like "most of the gameplay will occur around NY's "Brighton Beach" as lots of Russians reside there" should be removed, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with simply stating that the voice-over has some kind of Eastern European/Turkic accent. I mean, come on. -- Torvik 03:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Those are trivial things you noticed while watching the trailer. Saying "This is important enough to mention" is itself an original conclusion. If a fact is truly important, be patient; it will shortly be mentioned in a reliable source. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, what website would you consider to be a reliable source?Neshcom 03:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
A publication with an editorial process. Not someone's blog or fansite or personal site. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
How is claiming that his accent is this or that based on the sound trivial? It sounds like whatever kind of accent, it can be compared to someone in real life with that accent I would imagine rather easily, so what's the problem? -- Torvik 04:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, what's there now is appropriate. I thought you were talking about the big bulleted list of things some fansite noticed. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Well yeah, I kinda was. I don't remember any specifics (I could look in the history I guess, but O the laziness) however I thought I saw at least a few points in there that weren't speculative at all, just something pointed out in the trailer that you might not have otherwise noticed. Torvik 04:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
That's fansite material. Things you noticed while watching a trailer is original research, albeit inane original research. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess you're right, man. Torvik 04:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The news ticker in trailer

As well as mentioning the cheese crisis and the african markets being down on the wall street news ticker in the trailer, it also on the two lines on the top ticker "..says TAKE2+69% PAS – 2% DEV + 2% SOME SHARES HA.." "..HAVE GONE DOWN.." Rockstar knew people would read this ticker, so what are they trying to say? JayKeaton 05:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

To further that I have gleamed as much original research as I could from the video, here are my findings. Some of it is note worthy for the page, most of it is not. Seeing as people come to this page for information about this game, when there is hardly any information out yet on it, I think this list is justifiable on the talk page for now -

The Bank of Liberty is on the corner of Columbus Av and Calcium St -

The city newspaper is the “Liberty Tree” with the slogan “Yesterdays News Today -

Bean Machine is a coffee shop/chain of coffee shops in LC -

Ticker for the Liberty Tree says “OUR NEW SUV CONSUMES MORE PETROL THAN ANY OF OUR COMPETITORS” “FLASH SOAP MAKES YOU FEEL YOUNGER” “MORE MONEY MAKES YOU HAPPY” “11:34 TIME FOR A BROWN RING BAGEL” (then seconds after it says 11:52 then 12:01), “BUY MORE STUFF AS YOU CAN NEVER HAE ENOUGH” -

The trailer reveals a return of Burger Shot and Cluckin’ Bell. A woman is holding a bag from “SHODI” stores. A girl pedestrian is seen smoking a cigarette. -

The “ME TV THEATRE” is advertising a show called “All about me” -

Ads for the movie “I Slept With My Mom” -

A man is seen walking while reading a book then he drops the book and walks off. Another man is reading a paper as he walks. -

A cable car runs parallel to the suspension bridge. A pedestrian walkway and viewing platform is seen suspended directly under the bridge. -

The roads contain potholes and sheets of metal, meaning more detail even on the roads compared to just generic textures. Very high detail can be noted on the park chairs/benches”. Graphical errors in distant objects overlapping with close ones can be seen when the Russian walks across the bridge. The Statue of Liberty can clearly be seen in this video. JayKeaton 06:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by JayKeaton (talk • contribs) 06:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

And finally, GTA 4 heralds the return of the realistic painted NYPD police car. The original game had the realistic blue painted car originally but was changed to the black and white cruisers a few weeks before it's release. Now, though, the Liberty City PD cars more accurately than ever resemble the real life NYPD police cars (you can clearly see this right at the end of the 30th second of the trailer). This point was worth making in the "Cuts, changes, and the 9/11 effect" section of the GTA3 page, so it is certainly worth mentioning here JayKeaton 07:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC) A comparison of the GTAIV police cars and the real life NYPD cars can be seen at Image:LCPDcomparison.jpg JayKeaton 07:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't have removed the gameplay elements..

i know i gues theyu changed it since many people were complaing about the color in GTA3/GTA:LCS time--Butterrum 15:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

GTAIV staff vs. Vice City staff

So there's 150 developers working on GTAIV compared with 130 "non-voice actors and non-motion capture actors" on Vice City? What kind of actors were they then? It's pretty unclear. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.147.164.72 (talk) 07:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

It means that there were 150 artists, programmers writters and such working on it, not including voice actors and motion capture actors. It is trying to say that a lot of people actually worked ON the game, but it doesn't include the voice actors because the voice actors numbers don't "really" count towards the production of the game JayKeaton 07:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

You mean there's 150 game developers, not including actors, working on GTAIV, whereas there was a total of 130 people worked on Vice City, actors included? It's still not clear. The article should be definitely reworded because the phrase "non-voice actors and non-motion capture actors" doesn't make any sense to me. If you're not a voice actor or a motion capture actor, then what kind of actor are you in a video game? 193.203.139.179 21:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

It totally makes sense after he explained it. It's just worded wrong in the article. He's saying that they're not including actors in both counts. Just change the line in the article to "non-actors". --70.142.51.172 00:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, nevermind. Someone already changed it. :P --70.142.51.172 00:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

should it be mentiond?

should it be noted that the game seems to be set in liberty, yet the city is clearly portrayed in a far diffrent rendition. should it be mentiond that it may not take place within the previous GTA cannon? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.230.37.208 (talk) 08:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

I don't know since chances are we'll see some old faces from the previous series. But then it could be like GTA2 to GTA3 with no link between. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.241.114.119 (talk) 08:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

it is set in Liberty City--Butterrum 15:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

"Current Event"?

I've removed the current event tag, as the article had ended up with 3 different notices before the main paragraph even started, and in any case there's already one saying that it's an unreleased video game. I don't think 'current event' is really appropriate for a product in development anyway, is it? Paulfp 11:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking about this earlier. I agree. EntityHavoc 12:31, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

World Trade Center

This game is after or before the attacks? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.79.12.213 (talk) 13:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

The "attacks" never happened in GTA, so that's irrelevant. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 14:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

he means will the world trade centres be in the game as its based on/in new york. bcoz if its based before they might be there is its based after there will not, try to think a litte more open mindedly

If it wasn't in the trailer or there isn't an official source saying the WTC will be in the game then it cannot be added to the article. Only verifiable information can go into the article, not original research or speculation. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 15:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Exactly. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 16:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

the world trade center has been in GTA3 and LCS as well its called the Love Media buildings and there is no atttacks though im hopeing Drakel will apear as a boss--Butterrum 17:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

the guy was asking a question he never stated that it shud be put into the main article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.47.65.162 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 30 March 2007.

This page is for discussing improvements to the article only. It is not a forum. Questions should be answered on the assumption that the asker wants to improve the article rather than abusing the talk page. It's assuming good faith. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 22:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Official title

Rockstar have referred to the game as simply "IV" for a while now, and the trailer seems to back this up - making no mention of the GTA part. Is the title officially changed? I have created redirects from IV (game) etc for the time being. Yeanold Viskersenn 14:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
It's possible that it'll be known as "IV", but I don't think the title's changed personally. I can't find any sources that say the title's officially changed. on the xbox.com page it shows what could be the full logo/name. It's trademarked. That's the first time I've seen the new IV with the words by it. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 15:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

This game is gonna suck big time if it's just in liberty city again.

you kidding the CItys alot bigger then its GTA3 SELF BIGGER its remodled to it looks like its gonna be the bomb --Butterrum 15:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Talk about the article. Not the game. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 15:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

ok ok sorry so how was the trailer i didnt get ot see it because my computer is messed up im geting a new one--Butterrum 15:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

WHAO

i knew it was gonna be in Liberty City anyway whats the guy called i wanna know? dose anyone know? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Butterrum (talk • contribs) 15:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

No. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 15:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

well ok but can you tell me the 2nd answer Klp why is there a name and last name seems russian under the pic of the Russian man? is that his name do you know--Butterrum 15:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


GTA III -> GTA IV

I thought Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories would mark the end of the GTA III era, so GTA IV is like the GTA III era never existed. But I saw Cluckin' Bell, Burger Shot, MeTV, Heavy Weapons, Kronos, Sprunk, Liberty Tree... had somebody thoughts that GTA IV is just the working title and the final name will be released later so the GTA III era isn't gone yet? ProSieben 19:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

How does GTA IV mark the end of the GTA III era? It's just the continuation. The GTA III certainly is allowed to have existed. Torvik 21:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Exactly. What you said about the GTA III series ending is speculation, at this point. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 21:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
What's it matter either way? If it's the end of the GTAIII era it doesn't mean that its cannon and setting isn't part of GTAIV. --70.142.51.172 00:36, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I think he meant something sort of like the Sims. Example: GTA 3 is one game, and all the sub-games, maybe "expansions," are Vice City, San Andreas, LCS, and VCS. I don't think this is the case though, and if it is, it won't be for several years that we know, considering they would have to like, release four games under IV and then move on to VI or something along those lines, or announce that it's the truth. And it's likely they'll do neither, in my opinion. 12.107.246.198 02:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Yup. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 02:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

cannoncy

does any know ANYTHING about the games cannoncy? is it within the previouse timline, or are they "starting again"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.230.37.208 (talk) 23:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC).

Nobody knows anything about the game apparently. --70.142.51.172 00:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

All we know is from the trailer. That's it. EntityHavoc 14:45, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Not confirmed for the 360

The footage has not been confirmed to be running on either console, contrary to what the article states. I read the source, and the material clearly states that "THE CONSOLE ON WHICH THE FOOTAGE WAS CAPTURED HAS NOT BEEN CONFIRMED". Someone who can edit please fix this.


EDIT- thanks

-UD (72.47.111.44 06:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC))

Will be set in Liberty City.

Found this pic while browsing some forums. It's some screenshots from the trailer.CahalanesDunmanway 13:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we've pretty much established that one of the locations will be Liberty City, if it isn't the only one. EntityHavoc 14:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to put everything in the same place, here's a list of things that I've noticed that, in my opinion make it fine to put in the article that it's at least partially set in Liberty City:
  • 2 boats with Liberty written on them (This is a coincedence, they could be from somewhere else)
  • The Ferry Terminal says " IBER Y FER Y TERMINAL" with the letters missing, it most likely says "LIBERTY FERRY TERMINAL".
  • A sign on a building that says "I *heart* Liberty City"
  • A sign on a building that says "Welcome to Liberty City"
  • A police car says LCPD on the side
  • Variations of the word "liberty" written on buildings (Liberty Tree, Liberteen)
Not all of these are proof, but a couple of them are almost indisputable. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 23:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
We all know it's Liberty City. But Wikipedia's standards and practices does not allow us to say so yet. Pacific Coast Highway {talk • contribs} 23:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Dang, I thought it would be worldwide. Prove me wrong! Maybe, if they do, could make a sequence in 2008 after GTA4 with worldwide. You never know. LAcfm 03:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I see people are STILL not reading the above template.... ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 03:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I did READ!!! LAcfm 04:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

no you see GTA4 will be worldwide online lol i dont think there will be online playing on the PS3 but the Xbox360 will for shure --Butterrum 10:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Time Square

The article should notify readers that Time Square will not be called "Times Square" in the game. Since all GTA- worlds are copies of real citys/states. 217.211.211.182 18:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

At the moment the article says they resemble Times Square and other landmarks. This should be fine to indicate they're not exact replicas. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 23:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Main Character

It says in the caption under the photo of that guy, that he's the main character. Should it really say that? I mean, it's pretty obvious he's the main character, but it isn't 100% and should be considered incorrect until R* gives some proof he's the main character (e.g., a second trailer in which the character introduces himself ).

That's a good point, I've altered the text ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 23:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

well it has to be the main charater after all he talked in the trailer introducting us to his crimes and how he got to Liberty City also the magazine on game informer shows the Russain guy holding a gun hes got to be the main charater after all that--Butterrum 06:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

You're probably absolutely correct, but as it's not specifically said then it's best to just say character featured in the trailer and stuff like that when referring to him. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 01:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, he's not the one speaking for sure. His lips aren't moving, so if it is him, it's a monologue. It could just be a random NPC while the real main character is narrating. It probably isn't, but the possibility is still there, and needs to be taken in to consideration. 02:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

he dosent need to talk to be the main charater you know it chould just be like intro to make the trailer cooler and junk like that he was seen in every point of the trailer except for the parts it showed a close up of a building or brige in LC also now to think of it he also appeared in a Bansee in the movie strange huh what do you think Bill maybe we should wait till the May magazine comes out and if we see him on there agaiin you know the drill the magazine shows on iuts text that its gonna have MORE pics--Butterrum 10:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Thaaat, and . . . maybe we should . . . get you some punctuation. Just a suggestion. 12.107.246.51 03:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

picture overlap

i don't know if it is just my comp but in the section about the trailor the pic on the left overlaps the text. 121.127.194.46 01:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Fine with me useing Mozilla Firefox. AxG ۝۝۝҈ ►talk►guests 01:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Rockstar Advanced Game Engine

Please see Talk:Rockstar_Advanced_Game_Engine and help support this to be unprotected. Also take a look at the last good version —cmsJustin (talk|contribs) 02:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I feel it should come down when more info is known about it, but until then, leaving it alone seems sufficient. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 02:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Magazine preview

I think the preview isn't really notable enough to be mentioned on the page (at least in it's own section) until it's actually published and has some information when it can be used as a source. Saying that magazines will have a feature on something soon doesn't seem encyclopedic to me. What do other editors think? ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 03:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm not really an editor since the page is protected, but I'll say wait until the magazine article is published. Right now it's not adding anything useful about the game to the (wikipedia) article. An argument would be that it's good information for people to know because they might want to pick up that issue, but that's not the purpose of this article. (to talk about the game itself) Perhaps in the GameInformer article.

On the other hand, right now it could be part of a more comprehensive "Press/Reception" section.--70.234.44.60 07:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I think that while information on the game is scarce and that people who come to the page will be looking for more information on the game, then the encyclopedia will be doing its job, and be most useful if the upcoming feature in the magazine is included. I've noticed Wikipedia being increasingly affected with red tape and pedanticity with regards to the rules. I believe an article should contain whatever factual information we think would be relevant and useful to a person reading the article. At the end of the day, that's what people read Wikipedia for. Yeanold Viskersenn 03:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Controversy

I think we should put back the Controversy section and add this -> [2] Chegis 09:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a Russian Accent!

The narrator's accent is clearly Middle Eastern, not Russian. IGN's editors need to get a freakin clue.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.68.172.93 (talk) 05:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

I think that there should not be any speculation on the accent of the narrator, because no one can accurately say where the accent is from. 203.129.56.237 05:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes. Let's just wait for more information to come out to clarify his accent. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 06:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

he appears and sounds like a Russian not Arab Arab people are have a much darker skin color while the Russian guy has a just right Russian skin color geez havent anyone seen a REAL Russian before? I bealve you need to get a clue!--Butterrum 10:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Take a listen to how he says 'complicated' and 'smuggling'. Definitely East-European (maybe not Russian, I don't go to Eastern Europe too often :) (81.153.74.118 12:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC))
The article should probably just say "foreign" (as in foreign to the USA) until it's established where he's from. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 13:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

it sounds Russian to me ive heard Russians and seen one it ant Arab or East Europe even though i dont uderstand what you mean by East Europe but Bill your right we should just keep it Forgien for now till we know... oh Smuggleing and selling people (human trafficking) is quite comin in Russia,Mexico, Japan but hes not Asain nor Latino so hes got to be Russian hes dressed like a Russian ive seen a Russian dress like that in the movies--Butterrum 13:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Eastern Europe consists of a lot of former Soviet countries (ie they were one part of Russia) that have similar sounding accents to unaccustomed ears - hence the uncertainty as to the character's exact country of origin. I think "foreign" is slightly POV too, sort of an "us and them" mentality, but I suppose it will do until something better is written. Yeanold Viskersenn 14:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Until the character says, "Thank you, come again," or ,"Jihad, Jihad, Jihad," or perhaps, "Praise be Allah," it'd be a bit hard to discern him in to an Arab accent. To some people ( mostly people lacking ears - literally ) Russian accents might sound Arabian. But if the monologue is of the man we think it is, he's obviously not Arabian. However, this is all more or less point of view, and until the game is released or R* has a press conference about it, we probably won't be able to say for sure. 12.107.246.130 22:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I say Eastern European. And he probably won't say "Jihad, Jihad, Jihad". If he did, New York City would become New Baghdad City. Pacific Coast Highway {talk • contribs} 01:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Unless the game is going to be released only in the US, it is incorrect to say he has a "foreign" accent. Why say anything at all if you can't agree? --70.143.52.3 02:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I added the "foreign" part to try and remove any speculation about eastern European or Russian accents, it wasn't great and the foreign part was about how the accent is not from America yet it is set in America. I've changed it to "non-American", which is definitely correct yet vague, but I believe this information is notable enough to be included despite the difficulty in describing it without speculating. Hopefully the Game Informer article coming soon will give us more information that can be sourced. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 02:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

i love your style Bill real smooth hopefly the magazine will tell ask our question when dose it come out?....what the hell is a JIDAH? and why whould a guy that i think has a Russian accent be saying Jidah and ALLAH all the time R* not making GTA into Grand Theft Auto: Allah or Jidah City this Liberty City kid not some bombing place R8 dilikes use of terriost and thats why they removed the mid eastern guys from ped cheats--Butterrum 10:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Who said "Jidah"? --70.143.52.3 12:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
lulz butterrum, he was saying that unless the character was saying "Jihad" (fix'd btw) etc, then he would most likely not be shown as an Arab. tytyty repeating his point Wanka 16:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow, so because they're Arab, they have to say Jihad? You people are the biggest racists I've seen on Wikipedia.Xihix 16:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Although what they said was about as dumb, that's not exactly what they said. (and remember this is a GTA game so it will be full of stereotypes) --70.142.52.56 00:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that he's from the Caucasus region, which used to be part of the Soviet Union... possibly an Armenian. -- Davo88 17:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. We try. Pacific Coast Highway {talk • contribs} 17:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

again what dose Jidah mean i think hes again RUSSIAN!!!!!!!!--Butterrum 01:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Again you tell me. Nobody said Jidah. --70.142.52.56 02:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Definitely not Russian or Eastern European. Do you have any idea what an actual Russian looks like other than seeing how they dress "in the movies?" Russians are Slavic people, and most ethnic Russians have pale skin, light hair and blue or green eyes. I am betting each of you who is claiming the character is Russian a million bucks that he will not be from Russia or any other Soviet Republic, or anywhere from Eastern Europe for that matter. The whole Russian thing was started by IGN who are probably eating their words by now. The way he pronounced the word "people" is pretty much how Arabs say it. Go dig out an archived recording of Yasser Arafat and compare.

You seem to be betting that R* would rather be technically accurate than copy a characature(sic) of Russians seen "in the movies". --70.142.52.56 02:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that he's an Arab. I have some knowledge of Arabic, and the language doesn't have the letter "th" in it. If you pay attention to the trailer, you'd notice that he's unable to pronounce the word "things". Instead, he says "tings". If he was an Arab, he wouldn't have trouble. I don't know about Russian, but the Armenian language doesn't have the letter "th"... if you guys get what I'm saying... -- Davo88 03:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Just LOVIN' the unsourcable discussion, guys. Please continue. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 03:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Just take a look at the Wikipedia articles about those languages. -- Davo88 03:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Look, regardless of whether it's true or not, if it's unsourcable, then it's still original research. I realize that sounds stupid; crap, it probably sounds very stupid, but "them's the rules," as Yeanold put it. If you don't have any source from Rockstar on the subject, then discussing it ain't gonna help. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 03:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I know, this is speculation, if anything. -- Davo88 04:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
...which doesn't belong on this talk page, unfortunately. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 04:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually it doesn't have to use Rockstar as the source, depending on what the information is and how it's worded. The article doesn't have to only talk about what's actually in the game, but what's known/assumed/claimed by others. That's what the "unreleased game" template is for at the top of the page. That doesn't mean we should be arguing over unsourced speculation, but I think IGN is a reliable source for a videogame. (forgive me for not having read the entire guide on reliable sources) --70.142.52.56 08:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
"I think that there should not be any speculation on the accent of the narrator, because no one can accurately say where the accent is from." -203.129.56.237. that about sums it up 121.127.192.121 11:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't think adding something like "IGN speculates that his accent is Russian," and other opinion's expressed in their article is actually adding anything worthwhile. At the moment every gaming website and most people here are trying to decide on what accent it is. Eurogamer says "the main character appears to be of eastern European origin, Russian perhaps." By the time all the notable views on where the accent is from are added to the article there'd be a whole section on it, and as soon as Rockstar reveal where it's from the section would be deleted. Adding speculation by qualified sources, yet sources that don't have any hard evidence would not improve the article for someone who wants to know facts about GTA IV. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 11:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Well whether the information is worthwhile is certainly debatable here. What sources we choose to use is at our discretion too. I doubt the section would grow huge with people adding extra quotes, since there are really only two options. I agree though that it's dumb arguing about the guy's accent here. --64.149.47.0 03:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Usually I'm for using any source that's reliable (as Wikipedia policy says), but in this case as most sources are speculating then in my opinion there's more of a need to use a source much closer to the subject matter. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 16:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

you know Bill has a point...and yes ive seen a Russian movie hell i have alot of them i seen a movie where a Russian human trafficked with the Mexicans and Asia ive seen a movie where Americans were Human trafficked and were killed for cash i bet you my name that he is Russian (sorry Bill just fighting back with people)--208.125.114.250 14:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I am Russian and have lived in 4 different former Soviet republics, including the Caucasus, and the character's accent doesn't even sound close to how people from the region speak. In fact, I've never met a person from Russia or Eastern Europe who spoke like that. IGN is an authority on videogames, not on accents. Get a linguist's opinion on this, not some guy's who watched Rocky or The Red Heat.

I agree, we shouldnt trust movie accents on this. And by the way, why dont we just ask a Russian or Arab native speaker? And what do the Russian pages actually say on this matter? ( I cant verify, I dont speak Russian. All I can say he is definitely notDutch. ;)). - Redmess 16:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
The Russian Wikipedia says Eastern European, but you can't use Wikipedia as a source and it's unsourced there too. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 16:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Bill is right the Russian might be as confused as us or some guy just put it on there who knows i dont --69.205.61.185 16:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Can we PLEASE not refer to it as a "non american accent" like its something amazing that he's a non american....how bout just foreign? Gregg414

Who said that? ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 05:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Haha, I guess you'll get people to argue about anything on Wikipedia. The article used to say he had a foreign accent and I'm the one who complained that it should be changed to non-American. --70.128.121.136 07:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Gregg, the rationale for it being called "non-American" is explained above, "foreign" was also considered and even in the article for a while. Like I said, read up a bit to see why it was changed to "non-American". ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 13:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Ooooooh, that's who said that. Dang...I forgot. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 17:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Surely this cannot be "non-American" either, how do you define an American accent? An American of white European background? An American of Native American background? Is not someone from an Arab background (for the sake of argument) who has American nationality American? I don't believe the accent can be defined at all. John Hayes 10:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

wii version?

will there be a wii version of GTA IV? has it been confirmed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.168.171.227 (talk) 07:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

LoL it was an 1st aprill yoke Chegis 09:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
This game has likely taken millions of dollars and thousands of man hours to fit the PS3 and 360 architecture, porting it to the Wii would be a mammoth undertaking. It's not as easy as porting it to PC, unfortunately. If it was a simple task, no doubt they would do it. But no, I would bet a million bucks that you wont be seeing this version of GTAIV on the Wii. It may, however, get another version of it or maybe a rerelease of some old GTA games, anything is possible. Except GTAIV being ported to Wii JayKeaton 21:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
The Wii isn't powerful enough to run even GTA III. —cmsJustin (talk|contribs) 17:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
But the Wii is more powerful than the PS2, so I don't know how you figure that. Heck, even the Gamecube was more powerful than the PS2. But that's not the point JayKeaton 19:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
This is off topic and should be discussed here, which I am more than happy to do. —cmsJustin (talk|contribs) 19:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Some Trivia

I have just noticed some information you may have missed in the trailer. On the orange writing on the LCD screen thing it says: 1.Something about a cheese crisis 2.That the dutch markets are down and 3. That energy prices continue to rise. Could someone who has the hi-def trailer please verify this and maybe include it in the article? padddy5 22:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Well spotted, but I dont think it's notable enough to be included in the article. It's just background stuff of no (known) significance. The energy prices part might be an indication of the date the game is set, eg. present day, or in the 70s there was a large energy price rise iirc. (the vehicles, clothing, technology all suggest present day) But at the moment without any sources of info from Rockstar about it, it's not notable enough to be included imo. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 23:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
It also mentions something about Take-2s stock. I have listed as much as I can in a post above JayKeaton 07:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"Things Will Be Different"

Who gave it the name "Things Will Be Different"? Is this an official name? Perhaps it should just be called "Official Trailer". Also, there should be a better link to the tailor itself, such as the tailor on the MTV website. 203.129.39.86 00:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"Things will be different" is both the tagline attached to the GTA IV mailing list before the trailer's release, and it is what Rockstar have referred to the trailer as when answering questions about it. Yeanold Viskersenn 01:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
As far as the link goes, the first thing you see on the Rockstar website is the trailer (other than verifying your age once). Also, on the other link to Gamespy the trailer is included there. Another link isn't really needed. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 01:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Liberty City- definitely

The ferry terminal is disused and rundown. As anyone who played GTA:LCS will tell you, the ferry terminal was closed down and by 2001 was replaced by the porter tunnel. 159.134.48.148 10:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

yeah but GTA4 takes place in 2007 and the porter tunel is moved somewhere else and the Ferry Service was put in to ether make the Ferrys avelible again so you can take a crouse to Ellis Island besides swiming and taking a boat there--Butterrum 10:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no evidence it takes place in 2007, or for anything else that you have said there. Also in regards to the original point a ferry terminal being in both cities is not evidence that it is the same city.John Hayes 11:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

"Response"

I dont think "Response" is a good name for the section with JT and the NYC people. "Response" will be good once there's sales figures, reviews etc., but at the moment the article's suggesting that the only response is the ones of Jack Thompson and NYC officials. There has been plenty of responses from fans, magazines, critics and other people that know of the up coming game and the title of this section implies that they should be in there too. Perhaps the section should be renamed back to "Controversy" and then possibly renamed, or in addition to a response section later when there's more of a wide range of items to put in the article in that section. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 20:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, just change it back to "Controversy." I feel that's most at the current point in time. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 20:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes I thought the person who named it was implying that responses from fans and critics were also to be placed in that section, and they just didn't bother to add anything else, hoping another editor would. --70.142.52.56 00:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
That's right, I created the response section assuming that it will be the one that is going to grow most rapidly until next word from Rockstar. I'll change it to "controversy" for the time being. Yeanold Viskersenn 17:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, never mind, someone beat me to it. Yeanold Viskersenn 17:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
1up.com did a special on the response to the trailer, with editors from major magazines gaming writing what they thought of it. One of the editors noted that he felt it was a little odd that this game was so hyped, that they actually wrote up a special feature on the response to the trailer alone JayKeaton 19:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Name of the Guy

In the german Wiki they say that the guy from the trailer looks like "Jerkov", the leader of the russian mafia in gta 2. there is a comparison: [3](click at fatos on the left) (and they trade in body parts) --89.56.57.215 22:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

maybe the guy is claude 203.129.58.171 02:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
This is all unsourcable speculation, outside of the fact that this character and Claude look completely different. Discussions like this don't help anything, which is asserted by the template at the very top of the page. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 03:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
who are you to say that him and claude look different? 203.129.40.156 17:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Uhhh, because I have eyes??? Just look at them, man. They clearly look different: one obvious one is the hairstyle and the beard, which is different from Claude's; Claude has smaller eyes that this guy and has had a consistent clothing style in both of his game appearances, which is a black jacket and beige cargo-like pants, which is, once again, different from this character. One that could be seen as obvious is the fact that this character, more than likely, can talk, and with the support of storyline consistency, we can make an educated assumption that Claude still can't, or won't, talk. Either way, this is all speculation and needs to discontinue. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 18:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
But he really looks like Jerkov from GTA2 look at this [4] --89.61.181.123 22:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Regardless, this is still speculation. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 22:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
This speculative research could lead onto sourcable information which would be helpful tot his article. I am not familier with GTA2 though, so I can't say if it is possible or not JayKeaton 10:28, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Speculation may result in a source if it gives someone the idea to hunt down a source, but this is pure speculation. Looking at GTA to see if they look similar cannot result in a source that way. At the moment, because of all the speculation from gamers, forums and even some magazines, the sources for content should either be Rockstar directly or a magazine with information direct from Rockstar (e.g. Game Informer's may edition). You don't need to be familiar with GTA2 to be able to add the information if it's true and sourced, because the source will contain all the information you need. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 10:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Um, the second anonymous user wasn't really speculating. He was obviously screwing with you guys with a stupid comment to get a stupid response. --64.149.33.216 16:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, I have no trouble believing that he could have possibly been being serious, considering some of the stupid crap I've found on Wikipedia. With some of the stuff I've seen, that guy could still have been making a serious statement. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 18:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

omg your right Jerkov looks just like the Russian guy from GTA4 this chould be a sign that R* is bring back old faces (Claude Speed GTA2 Claude GTA3)--69.205.61.185 04:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Please bring up sourcable information, or this discussion is subject to removal. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 04:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I did don't be so mean and pushy because people are trying to bring up stuff like clues.--69.205.61.185 06:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't being mean or pushy; you also should be worried more about being not getting blocked...if you know what I mean, and I'm sure you do. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 05:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

No not really?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.205.61.185 (talk)

oh yeah klyptyzm you really are an old hand teach me your wise wisdom - all hail king klyptzm, defender of the weak, making sure that no one says anything "unsourcable". 203.129.59.20 10:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Heh heh, I like that title; I always did fashion myself a defender from unsourcabilicality. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 17:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Game Informer

Slightly off-topic but does anyone know the date that the GTA IV feature issue will be released? Sorry for cluttering the thread. Yeanold Viskersenn 22:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

According to this pdf (page 16), we'll get our next source of info on the 18th of April. On the forum I found that I have heard that some people in certain jobs (media I assume) get the magazine early so scans will end available on the web. I don't know if they can be included in the article as a source though because it's not exactly easy to verify if the magazine's not for sale yet. Hmmm, That's going to be a problem if scans do turn up before the date it goes on sale, because people will start adding information to the article which will be true, yet unsourcable for a few days. We should probably decide on whether including information from an unreleased magazine. According to WP:V, sources must be "already published". An off topic question ended up very much on topic! ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 01:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)


Trailer treats

i wanted to know more about GTA 4 so i checked everywhere and found onr site that showed detail on whats in the trailer and stuff its this link it details everything seen and pics http://planetgrandtheftauto.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Articles.Detail&id=90&game=11--69.205.61.185 06:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


Main character's resemblance

Seeing how I added this only to see it arbitrarily removed ten minutes later, I figured that I'd mention it here rather than add it back in and see it arbitrarily removed again. There has been a lot of speculation since the trailer was released that the character shown is based off of Vladimir Mashkov's character in 2001's Behind Enemy Lines. The first publication to comment on this was PSX Extreme, and Kotaku in turn mentioned it.

See here - I think that this is more than worthy of a mention somewhere in the existing format of the article. --Warrior-Poet 06:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

It's nothing but speculation from both the sites (PSX Etreme and Kotaku). Both are just saying how they've noticed similarities and neither have any hard evidence. Including it in the article would add nothing to it. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 14:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

i do see how the Russian main charater looks like Vladimir abd is looks aas if its the charater is based off of him and Jerkov looks just like the Russian main charater you all do know who Jerkov is right hes the Russian Mafia Don notice how Claude Speed from GTA3 pops up and them Jerkov from GTA2 looks just like the Russian guy from GTA4 and he poped up then people were talking about him all of a sudden chould it be a sign that the GTA2 charaters are returning (Claude Speed in GTA2 and GTA3 Jerkov GTA2 probly the Russian guy in GTA4) somthing tells me the main charater in GTA4 is gonna start somthing big--69.205.61.185 16:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

If you don't have any credible, official sources, then please don't try to make such claims. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 05:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
It probably is Jerkov but since there is no source to prove it then like BishopTutu said we can't add anything about it to the article yet. --70.128.121.136 07:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

True...I am sorry for making youi mad Klyptzm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.205.61.185 (talk)

Besides my anger what dose my spelling have to do with the main charater? Huh? tell me and answer my question!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.125.114.250 (talk)

You didn't make me mad. I'm just telling you. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 23:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


I don't really care who it is (yet), but could 69.205.61.185 please learn about spelling, grammar and punctuation please (particularly full stops). Harveymuso 03:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

FOR THE LAST TIME PLEASE DON'T MAKE FUN OF HOW I SPELL!! Ok? I'm starting to get mad at everyone who makes fun of my spelling! Well look at you Harveymuso your a sped!...Wow uhh i'm sorry I just got so mad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.125.114.250 (talk)

Perhaps you've been misunderstanding. Nobody is making fun of you. (although I can only speak for myself) We only want you to correct your behavior so we can work together more easily. --70.142.41.76 04:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Be quiet PLEASE I can type however I choose to ok! Your the ones making fun of me!! Don't haide it!

True, and other editors can respond accordingly; if you don't type like a normal human being, they you won't be helped like one. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 21:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

High-Resolution pictures

What happened to the high-res pics that used to be linked from the smaller pictures on the article? Now the "Times Square" screenshot says "No higher resolution available." I think it's pretty obvious in an article on a "next-gen" game like this (which runs in 720p) that high resolution screen grabs are important. --70.128.121.136 07:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes high resolution shots would be good, but the problem is with fair use. If an image is too large then it will fail the fair use criteria that Wikipedia policy requires we adhere to. The images are still available on the web and the trailer's available on the links so not is all lost for the reader. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 13:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Rating

I've noticed that on the Amazon UK search results page for GTA 4, it says that the PEGI Rating is 18+, on the product pages it says the BBFC rating is 18. On each of the websites for these companies however they don't list the game details. This could mean that the ratings will be out soon, they've only released the ratings to retailers, or Amazon's making an assumption (I'm not sure if they're allowed to do that). As it's not on the official sites, I don't think it should be in the article yet, but hopefully the ratings will be released officially soon so they can be added. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 01:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, we should probably keep an eye out for it; I do feel that maybe Amazon got their info from a source, though. I don't think they just made a random assumption with no basis. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 01:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Does rating differ between country, by chance? I mean, I assume it's determined by the morality of each individual country. Assuming the ESRB isn't universal. >_> 12.107.246.51 03:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it probably is an assumption based on the previous games - as the BBFC etc can't really give a rating to a game that is still in the development stages. Yeanold Viskersenn 09:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Jack Thompson too long

The section on Thompson reads like a newspaper article; it has far to many details for Wikipedia. I would like to shorten it to the following:

"American anti-obscenity activist Jack Thompson has stated he will take various measures to prevent the sale of the game to minors. Thompson's campaign seems to be solely focused on the Xbox 360 release of Grand Theft Auto 4, making no mention of the PS3 version at all.[12]

On 16 March 2007, Take Two Interactive filed a lawsuit against Thompson in attempt to block him from trying to declare the games a public nuisance.[13]"

Any objections?162.119.232.106 15:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

That sounds fine to me. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 16:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Cool. Fine by me. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 17:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. I've made the update.Ryanpm4545 22:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Game Informer leaked scans

It's been leaked and information, such as the name, has started to get inserted to the article. I will try and hunt down the policy for using leaked magazine articles as sources. If anyone knows it, please post it here. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 15:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

The magazine has not been leaked. Someone has got it via subscription earier than everyone else. Darkchicken101 16:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the clarification ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 16:49, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah - I think now that it is available to the general public (albeit subscribers), then it can be used as a valid source. There seems to be a hella lot of new info in there too! Yeanold Viskersenn 17:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Niko Bellic???????????

Bold textWhere did you hear that the name of the main character of Gta IV will be Niko Bellic???? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mammonak (talk • contribs) 16:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

Game Informer confirmed it: http://www.gta4.net/news/3857/game-informer-reaches-subscribers/ —cmsJustin (talk|contribs) 16:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)