Talk:GTA III Era

From Grand Theft Wiki
Revision as of 20:19, 9 September 2010 by A-Dust (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

GTA Advance

I think it should remain in the GTA III Era; makes more sense to keep it there, as it would be confusing to see a game from 2004 (I.E. San Andreas) in the GTA III Era, then see Advance in the GTA I / GTA II Era. CJ 16:21, 9 April 2007 (BST)

It makes sense to put GTA Advance in the GTA III Era because of the time it was released, but the rest of the games in the GTA III Era are so similar to each other and so different from GTA Advance. GTA III, GTAVC, GTASA, GTALCS and GTAVCS are all along the same lines - they look the same, they have interlinking stories and recurring characters - GTA Advance doesn't fall into that as much (although it does link in a bit). Bear in mind that GTA Advance was developed by different studios too, it doesn't fit into the GTA III Trilogy (III, VC, SA) or the GTA III Saga (III, VC, SA, LCS, VCS). I'm going to keep it in the Era because it does overlap slightly with Liberty City and 8-ball. The discussion continues. Xenon (Admin) talk 16:47, 9 April 2007 (BST)

I agree with CJ. Also, the game is in fact a direct prequel to GTA III. The events in the game take place a year before GTA III started - you could argue for this reason it should go in another era, but IMO it sets up the rest of the series. So for that reason I think it should be kept in the GTA3 era. So, although it is a very different game, it is directly related. --Chris 16:58, 9 April 2007 (BST)

It should stay, it was made in the GTA III Era, and the storyline even connects on the events of GTA III. George 09:34, 23 April 2007 (BST)

I'm thinking this should stay in the GTA III era Timeline because it is a prequel to GTA III. Although, it is a very badly done prequel which I'm not surprised that some people have rejected it as canon.