Talk:Victor Vance: Difference between revisions

mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 40: Line 40:
::Gboyers changed the colouring of links back to staff members name, with Admins being orange. This is designed to make the staff members names stand out from the blue and red links on the wiki. Although I can't see it anyway. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 22:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
::Gboyers changed the colouring of links back to staff members name, with Admins being orange. This is designed to make the staff members names stand out from the blue and red links on the wiki. Although I can't see it anyway. [[User:A-Dust|A-Dust]] 22:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


So, why does this article have to be written in such a certain way concerning the death situation? I did my best to make it look non-speculating, but A-Dust reverted it without explanation on the edit summary. It's best to say that the Vance brother was ''possibly'' Vic and that he is indeed not mentioned in the game at any point by name but only on the crime tree of VC's site which doesn't exactly clear up anything either. My 2 cents, besides I don't care what anyone say, I just am tired of being linked to fan-sites and wiki's on forums whenever I'm into this argument. As update, I see you are trying to add "sources" to show what you believe, but honestly you can go and dig up millions of reviews saying Vic is dead or fan sites but none of them actually answer the question. It's like fan-sites and wiki assist together in this to get as many people to believe them and things they say. I'm not saying it's impossible that Vic died but to make it as "fair" as possible to all believers of this theory it's best to just type "possibilities" and "thoughts" as no one is gonna get confused or recommended to believe what this site amongst many other write. And the gamespot is not the best ever to use as it's just reviews. I mean I can also go and write a review on VCS then type throughout that Vic wasn't present in VC, but that doesn't mean it's a fact, it's just what I think on the whole situation. --''[[User talk:GTA4PC|GTA 4 PC]]'' 16:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
So, why does this article have to be written in such a certain way concerning the death situation? I did my best to make it look non-speculating, but A-Dust reverted it without explanation on the edit summary. It's best to say that the Vance brother was ''possibly'' Vic and that he is indeed not mentioned in the game at any point by name but only on the crime tree of VC's site which doesn't exactly clear up anything either. My 2 cents, besides I don't care what anyone say, I just am tired of being linked to fan-sites and wiki's on forums whenever I'm into this argument. As update, I see you are trying to add "sources" to show what you believe, but honestly you can go and dig up millions of reviews saying Vic is dead or fan sites but none of them actually answer the question. It's like fan-sites and wiki assist together in this to get as many people to believe them and things they say. I'm not saying it's impossible that Vic died but to make it as "fair" as possible to all believers of this theory it's best to just type "possibilities" and "thoughts" as no one is gonna get confused or recommended to believe what this site amongst many other write. And the gamespot source(s) is/are not the best ever to use as it's just reviews. I mean I can also go and write a review on VCS then type throughout that Vic wasn't present in VC, but that doesn't mean it's a fact, it's just what I think on the whole situation. --''[[User talk:GTA4PC|GTA 4 PC]]'' 16:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:24, 22 January 2009

Year of Birth

The information states that he is 28 years old in 1984, meaning he could have been born in either 1955 or 1956. If he was born in 1955 it would mean he'd be 29 by the end of 1984, but could still have been 28 at the time of GTA Vice City Stories. A-Dust 17:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Death

Yeah I know it's the death situation brought up again. But I don't get it, why is the article written in a "100% sure" way like it's been proved completely that Vic died. Rockstar never said anything about who it really was and we can't do anything other than speculate. It's just as fair as adding the same thing in the Pete Vance article. I strongly believe that Vic is alive and didn't take part in the deal, if you need reasons for my theory then I'll show em up. GTA 4 PC 15:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The only Vance brother mentioned, other than Lance, is Victor. He is listed on the official GTA Vice City website as the leader of the Vance Crime Family. Lance's police record shows he just arrived in town with his brother, which is Victor. There is no mention of Pete Vance whatsoever, he was just added for the GTA Vice City Stories storyline. A-Dust 15:27, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
It's just a police report and if you actually connect the two games then you'll see quite a few good reasons as to why it can't be Vic. I know it's just speculation, but the file naming "Victor Vance" doesn't show anything other than him running the Vance Crime Family and being Lance's brother. Vic in VCS said numerous times he hates drugs and doesn't want any involvement with them in any way once he's got the money for Pete's health. He sends the money in the end of VCS. Maybe the article should be a little less sure. I am explained it in awful wording but I mean like (1955/1956 - 1986(?) ), I'm just wondering why the believers of Vic's death in VC have what they think is true as fact and we (who believe the opposite) are unreliable? You gotta look at both sides instead of looking for the slightest mention. So let me ask a question, if that was Vic why did he have a different accent and why did he act like somebody who had some kind of sickness? I'm just making a point as to why we shouldn't be so clearly sure about it when the game developers haven't said a word. GTA 4 PC 15:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
First of all, Vic also said he did not want to become involved in the criminal world, and by the end of GTA Vice City Stories he is the biggest criminal in the entire city. As for the drugs, he could either have been corrupted by 1986 or needed more money for Pete. As for the different accent, that is called a retcon. As for sickness, maybe he was sick at the time. When Victor is the only Vance brother (other than Lance) mentioned for GTA Vice City, then it should be clear that it is Vic and not Pete, who was created to further GTA Vice City Stories storyline. A-Dust 16:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
And your answers are all personal opinions as well. Vic is only mentioned on the police report. My point to make it look like Pete is that Lance was ignored by Vic and decided to get Pete (who was getting better) to do the deal and then the police mistook the brother for being Vic since he was known around the city. As we see I don't see this discussion ever coming to an end and rather just more and more reasons as to why each side believes something. Well I'm going to put my five top reasons as to why Vic wasn't the brother present in VC.

1. Vic in VCS didn't have an accent and spoke English in a proper American way. - Yes that's one of the main reasons we believe Pete died instead, there is no reason Vic would change his way of speaking like that.

2. The guy in VC sounded like he had suffered from asthma or some sickness. - That's the case with Pete, in the end of VCS Vic sends some money to him and the bills are paid so he gets better.

3. The appearance between Vic and the VC brother changes a lot. - Not only clothes, but the eyes and the head size have suddenly changed? I know weight, hair and stuff can change in two years but never knew that could happen to eyes and size of head.

4. Vic said he was out by the end of VCS. - True, he said there's no way he's dealing anymore because he's got all he was out for when he was in the army but instead with the empire. He leaves it behind and lays low. Lance is good at convincing? But what excuses are there when Vic has no longer anything to worry about? At first we could understand he needed the money and all, but now he's sent the needed money to Pete and it's done.

5. Lance after being ignored by Vic could have asked Pete to team up in Vice City and do the drug deal. - Lance was the pilot, in VCS Vic told him to never ever drive again after "Jive Drive", plus in the deals in VCS it was always Lance who traded with the buyers/dealers and Vic was only there to save him from trouble. In VC it's the complete opposite?

That's what I have to say, now I know you'll come back with a bunch of excuses to cover all these plot holes (if you want to consider it this way) but that's what I have to say. --GTA 4 PC 16:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The first reason can be explained through a retcon. Your second point is opinion, besides, Victor could be ill or have contracted a disease between 1984 and 1986. The third can be explained through retcon. Maybe Vic has problems caused by Lance, maybe Pete's condition gets worse or maybe he needs money to help his mother kick the habit. Or maybe he just wants more power and money, being resentful of Diaz getting all the money after he had killed the Mendez Brothers and Martinez. As for the fifth point, maybe Victor doesn't want Lance to screw up after he did so many times in GTA Vice City Stories. Also, it seems the only excuses are coming from you in your attempt to prove something that is incorrect and has been proven otherwise. Vic is the Vance brother killed as he is the only Vance brother (other than Lance) mentioned on the GTA Vice City website and prior to VCS. A-Dust 23:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
All of your responses are opinions as well. And Vic is never mentioned in the game (VC) but his name is dropped as Lance's brother on the website and that was put when VCS was released, right? That is something obvious for me, that means they wanted to make the Vic's death supporters a little bit to backup and then the Pete side have more reasons. Plus in Lance's file in the police report it just mentions 'his brother' not Victor Vance. And Vic could have just been around the city but not in the business or as the police heard Lance's arrival with his brother they quickly thought of Vic since he was the big criminal alongside Lance. So it can be mistaken as Vic as well... Either way, I find it unfair how "Vic's death" theory supporters have their opinion shown as fact whereas the opposite has only a small section with none of the reasons I pointed showing up. --GTA 4 PC 15:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, my main response if fact - Victor is mentioned on the GTA Vice City website whereas Pete is mentioned for four until Vice City Stories was released. The reason it is shown as fact is because it is fact, whilst the pure fan fic idea of Pete is not. A-Dust 21:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Not really, I don't see how it's a fact, he's just mentioned, that takes too long to explain all over, so I wont bother. But I don't see it as a fact, R* never confirmed who it was in the end so I still don't see why we should start typing out things that are not even confirmed as it will cause more confusion. And a bit random but why is your name in orange now? --GTA 4 PC 21:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Gboyers changed the colouring of links back to staff members name, with Admins being orange. This is designed to make the staff members names stand out from the blue and red links on the wiki. Although I can't see it anyway. A-Dust 22:29, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

So, why does this article have to be written in such a certain way concerning the death situation? I did my best to make it look non-speculating, but A-Dust reverted it without explanation on the edit summary. It's best to say that the Vance brother was possibly Vic and that he is indeed not mentioned in the game at any point by name but only on the crime tree of VC's site which doesn't exactly clear up anything either. My 2 cents, besides I don't care what anyone say, I just am tired of being linked to fan-sites and wiki's on forums whenever I'm into this argument. As update, I see you are trying to add "sources" to show what you believe, but honestly you can go and dig up millions of reviews saying Vic is dead or fan sites but none of them actually answer the question. It's like fan-sites and wiki assist together in this to get as many people to believe them and things they say. I'm not saying it's impossible that Vic died but to make it as "fair" as possible to all believers of this theory it's best to just type "possibilities" and "thoughts" as no one is gonna get confused or recommended to believe what this site amongst many other write. And the gamespot source(s) is/are not the best ever to use as it's just reviews. I mean I can also go and write a review on VCS then type throughout that Vic wasn't present in VC, but that doesn't mean it's a fact, it's just what I think on the whole situation. --GTA 4 PC 16:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)