Talk:Grand Theft Auto IV/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 → Archive 10

Locations and settings

Comprised of five boroughs based on the boroughs of New York City, as well as parts of New Jersey. Broker is the GTA IV equivalent of Brooklyn, Manhattan is now called Algonquin (a play on the fact that 'Manhattan' was also the name of a Native American tribe), Queens is now Dukes, the Bronx is Bohan, and New Jersey is Alderney (after the Channel Island of the same name. I dont see staten island included anywhere in this so shouldn't it be rephrased to something more like " all of the five boroughs except for staten island" or " it includes 4 out of the 5 boroughs of New York City ( not staten island)". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.23.243.88 (talk) 23:01, 19 August, 2007 (UTC)

No, It is saying the game has five boroughs, based on the 4 boroughs of New York that are listed, and the one based on New Jersey. John Hayestalk 08:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Before we head into an edit war (it's already been switched back and forward twice today), can we decide which logo we are going to use:

(Removed images that had changed - logo had become cover art - have now removed cover art from here, cover art is only covered by fair use rational for article pages) - X201 (talk) 09:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

John Hayestalk 16:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Personally I don't see why we shouldn't use the boxart, but Nlitement seems to think that is wrong. I'm not greatly fussed either way, but we should have good reasons for one or the other. John Hayestalk 16:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I believe that the box art is just a mock-up and has been around for some time now. It's being used as a placeholder until the official artwork is done. That's just what I've heard and I'm not 100% certain. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 16:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, I wouldn't revert it a third time, ;). It's not final, but it's alright to put it there because that's what the press is circulating around now. --nlitement [talk] 17:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm a PS3 boy but I think that boxart is just a mockup and when we have a pure logo I think we should use that considering it isn't PS3 only. Sadly. Darkwarriorblake 17:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I too think it is probably a place holder mock-up. I'm not massively fussed as to which is used, although if the box art is used I think a note stating that it is unknown if this is the final artwork should be added. - X201 18:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm the one that reverted the logo for the box art not realizing that it was a mock-up, though in hindsight I probably should have since the release date is so far away. I can't revert it back to the logo since I already have two reverts but the mock-up should definitely not be used since it's not an official image. - Throw 20:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Done. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 20:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Bill! - Throw 20:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
No problemo ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 21:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok that explains it all. I hadn't released it was a mockup either. John Hayestalk 22:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The final box-art will most likely be the paneled artwork depictions like in pretty much all of the games so far. 12.107.246.57 23:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

rating

Shall we just put a 'TBC' in the rating box to try and prevent anyone in the future from messing with it? TBC seems pretty standard for unreleased works.Darkwarriorblake 11:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah why not. John Hayestalk 15:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I think "Rating Pending" is more appropriate since it's waiting for a rating. Any promotional material for a game that hasn't been rated has RP as a placeholder until it's rated. - Throw 04:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Well that works too. Its probably a regional thing because in the US its rating pending, in the UK its TBC. Oh wait, aren't we doing this article in British English? Well either works, need some more input but I guess for now just leave TBC unless someone thinks Rating Pending is better.Darkwarriorblake 06:47, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

There's no need for a place holder. The game either has a rating or it doesn't. When it has a rating fill in the rating field, otherwise just leave it blank, that is the whole point of fields not being displayed if there isn't any data in them. We don't create articles as place holders for things that we know will happen so there's no need to do the same with template fields. But forced to choose between one of them TBC sounds far more accurate than pending - X201 11:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia does have placeholders, for pictures in biographies for instance. Promotional material for unrated video games lists a game as RP because they have to. See both the image of the NYC ad and the image showing the Ultimate Collection. They both have RP on them. There shouldn't be a difference here. - Throw 12:42, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Taxibepot.jpg

Image:Taxibepot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Man, I hate this fucking bot. - Throw 05:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
To be fair, it does a useful job. It shouldn't be too hard for someone to fill in the missing details. John Hayestalk 06:57, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it serves a useful purpose but take one look at my talk page; Ol' BetacommandBot has been annoying me regularly for the past few weeks. Makes me feel it's Big Brother sorta. - Throw 12:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
Haha, yeah. John Hayestalk 13:33, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Threat by Thompson

Isn't Jackass Thompson banned from trying to ban Take Two's games? DAVID CAT 22:25, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he is, but, unfortunately, that wouldn't stop him from filing another lawsuit. Any lawsuit, regardless of how frivolous, is allowed to be filed. Thompson doesn't have a chance, though, because Two-Take would be covered under parody laws. - Throw 22:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually, reading the settlement I think Thompson could still sue Take-Two because the settlement regarded any "future games", so that could mean anything that comes after GTA4. - Throw 22:37, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
  1. He can still sue using some sort of third party because the settlement only covered that "HE" can not interfere with Take-Two or Rockstar Games and any of their sales but it does not cover that if someone else helps him sue. If someone else hires him as their lawyer and brings any case to court in the future that involves Rockstar Games and Take-two, they can't do nothing bout it except trying to defend them selfs through-out the case. And....
  2. This is NOT a discussion topic(Notice on top of Discussion Page in orange like box). IF You wanna discuss this subject Go to GTA Forums or something but not here. This is a place where we talk about how to update the "Article" itself. Not Yours and others opinions.

Read >>> Thompson vs. Grand Theft Auto

--҉ რɫՒ◌§ 9¤ ॐ 23:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I love how you chose to enter into, and in turn add to the discussion, only to finish by stating how this is not the place to discuss it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.162.25 (talk) 15:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Being neutral you probably shouldn't refer to him as "Jackass" John Hayestalk 16:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Firstly, he is a jackass, and secondly, NPOV only applies to articles, not talk pages: All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopaedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly, proportionately and without bias. A talk page is neither an article or encyclopaedic content DAVID CAT 17:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
It was only a friendly suggestion, but if you are going to start throwing policy at me I would suggest you read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Maintain Wikipedia policy, specifically The policies that apply to articles also apply (if not to the same extent) to talk pages, including Wikipedia's verification, neutral point of view and no original research policies.. All I'm saying is that this page isn't the place for your opinions on Jack Thompson. John Hayestalk 17:55, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
You've got me there i suppose, but do you or do you not consider him a jackass? DAVID CAT 18:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I would watch what you Say(not to be mean or anything) Thompason Does have access to Wikipedia and if he does feel offended, like anyone else he could take action on the entire Wikipedia site and etc. So I would suggest do not discuss anything or opinions about him here. Go to the GTA4 forums or something and talk about him there, Here is a big NO Like What John Hayes Posted. Again The Talk page is to talk about how to "IMPROVE" the article not to express how u feel about someone or your opinions. --҉ რɫՒ◌§ 9¤ ॐ 22:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

do you honestly think he would read the talk page of the game he hates most in the whole world?DAVID CAT 17:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Then I would ask how did he come to know about the mission in the game that is a reference to him? Really buying gamer magazines or on the Web. If he did not know anything about it THEN there will be no threat made towards Rockstar Games. --҉ რɫՒ◌§ 9¤ ॐ 15:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
He wouldn't have got it from wikipedia, which only mentioned the mission after he made a fuss about it DAVID CAT 16:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Still It doesn't mean that does not check here. He already threatened the kotaku site because of a user who wanted to talk down about him. After that event, webmasters on certain sites that talk about him tried their best not to be the next kotaku and get sued because they were speaking their opinions. Who expected Jack to go on the kotaku forums and look for info. there? Like I said anything is possible and if Thompson feels threaten while on here, he wouldn't mind suing wikipedia for making a bias article about him with false information, banning his account and users threatening him. So please voice your opinions about him somewhere else but here. Thank You --҉ რɫՒ◌§ 9¤ ॐ 20:13, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
The jackass has an account here???? coooolDAVID CAT 11:14, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Seriously, there is no need to tempt fate. John Hayestalk 10:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok, i'll stop but only because this is getting off the point of my original question DAVID CAT 20:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Delete

lets delete every unsourced statement in the article. ∆ Algonquin 10:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Instead of doing something so drastic why don't we try finding sources first? - Throw 13:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, unless it's clearly incorrect, or legally dubious, lets leave it, and instead stick a {{Fact|date=September 2007}} behind it. John Hayestalk 20:08, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I just hate reading an article and seeing those annoying {{Fact}} tags because a) they look bad and b) they make you wonder if what you are reading is complete bullshit. Perhaps someone can make a list (maybe on TF:GTA) of statements that need sources... ∆ Algonquin 09:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Well that's the point, if you see them, try to replace them with a source, and they are also there to make the reader question if what they are reading, is for the want of a better phrase "complete bullshit". John Hayestalk 09:57, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Technically, he does have the right to remove the "bullshit". The burden lies on the editor adding the dubious information, not others. Pacific Coast Highway {talk • contribs} 23:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
If the citation needed flag has been in situ for quite a while (one month + in my opinion, but it is only a matter of opinion) feel free to remove them from the article and place them on the talk page stating what you have done, that way the information is not lost and the article does not have uncited information in it. - X201 21:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
The second unsourced statement in the new features section is complete bullshit (heard it here first) i have read every new article about the game (hell i submitted a few to the article) and not since the turkish mag fiasko have i seen so much crap so it is my understanding that if someone disputes an unsourced statement it can be removed so here i am disputing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.66.110 (talk) 12:29, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Which statement? "While in a taxi Niko can pay the driver more to go faster, or he can just listen to the radio and watch the city go past."? I have read that in the official Playstation magazine, i'll try and find a source. John Hayestalk 13:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I can tell you the exact source. It's PSU3 magazine issue 13 (The person who added the info told me which site the got it from and I was able to find out which magazine it had come from. Only problem is getting hold of a damn copy to verify the citation. I've asked on the VG Project and the Playstation project and no one has a copy of it. It was (now merged with Play magazine) published by Imagine Publishing. - X201 21:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

When's it set?

It was supposed to be set in 2007 but it's being released in 2008. Do you think Rockstar will change it or leave it? On Game Stores UK it says that GTA IV is coming out the 4th of April 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.43.127.77 (talk) 09:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any sources saying it is set in 2007 either. Unless it is verifiable it's not worth mentioning. John Hayestalk 09:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
And as regards the release date, just trawl the internet and you will find loads of on-line stores all claiming to know the release date and every single one will be different. The simple fact is that Take Two are going to be releasing the game and they have not said when that will be. - X201 10:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
I remember reading an interview with eather Dan or Sam Houser saying the game takes place in October, 2007. It would make sense because the game was supposed to come out on that month. Gamerzworld 01:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Special Edition

Is the preorder for the special edition now out of stock? If so, that should be mentioned. --Sycotherejekt 21:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

It cant be out of stock the game is not even in production stage yet. Its still in development.... --҉ რɫՒ◌§ 9¤ ॐ 23:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, but it was said there was only a limited number of this edition. It's not technically out of stock, but that doesn't mean the entire quota wasn't already ordered.--Sycotherejekt 01:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
If it is notable, and discussed in reliable third party sources, then yes. If it has been seen on some site such as play.com then no. John Hayestalk 07:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Insider information

If i were perhaps a Rockstar employee and had information not yet released to the public, how would i go about adding information to the article seeing as there are no "official" sources on this information? just removing some facts that aren't true and adding a few small bits of information. 202.156.66.110 14:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

A Rockstar employee who is currently on holiday in Singapore. Perhaps? Nothing goes into the article unless it has a reliable source (Newspaper, Magazine, reputable online site) to back it up. - X201 14:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
One of the most important rules to remember is that verifiability is more important than "the truth". John Hayestalk 15:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Also, not being a liar helps.... Just puttin' that out there. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 20:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
you guys are missing my point. how are you supposed to source things like that? when i said "just removing some facts that aren't true and adding a few small bits of information" i meant not huge things but small stuff. if i knew i was going to be answered by a few smart arse sweaty palmed jack offs who spend their time tracing IPs i would have phrased my question differently. and if i were going to pretend to be some kind of employee why the fuck would i use my I.P address and not make some random account? 202.156.66.110 11:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
or if i wanted to be like you guys i would have found out the IP for ireland and then made a user account with that as my name so you guys would think i am some employee, you being the sweaty palmed jack offs you are —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.66.110 (talk) 11:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Being an employee or not isn't really relevant. Dan Houser himself could come here and add info, and even if we knew it was him we would have to remove it unless it is backed up by a reliable, independent, third-party source. John Hayestalk 15:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
You said "if I were a developer at Rockstar" and I replied with a light hearted joke about your IP not being in the same country as Rockstar, I then gave you the answer to your question. You took offence and called me a "sweaty palmed jack off". Why do I bother? - X201 18:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Just calm down. And he did say 'If' he was a Rockstar employee. 'If' its a word look it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.188.142 (talk) 14:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

If you want to remove erroneous additions, by the way, go ahead and do it - if they've been sitting there without a source for some time. Any of us who have an account can do it, I'm thinking. Just put what you remove on the talk page here somewhere, stating you removed them, in case they turn out to be true and you're lying through your teeth. Just a suggestion. 12.107.246.112 03:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

But only if they are unsourced, if they are sourced you will have to provide another source which disproves the original source. John Hayestalk 07:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
sorry i was a bit too harsh with my words, i was just annoyed at being called a liar by that arrogant prick kptzym who is so up himself that he cannot differentuate between a legit question and lying. i had a look at the archives and this guy is shitting on about being relevant on talk pages and his comment about being a "liar" is just plain hypocracy. "just putting it out there" i think we got ourselves a grade A arsehole here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.66.110 (talk) 10:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I like how you "apologized" for your harsh words then preceded to call me a prick. THAT, my friend, is the definition of hypoCRIcy, which you so cutely misspelled. Also, how else am I supposed to respond to a person asking such a question as you asked? That's one of the silliest things I've seen on Wikipedia yet, and sir I've seen some pretty extreme things, ESPECIALLY recently. I made that "liar" remark because it blatantly looked like you were trying to act as if you actually had inside info and was a Rockstar developer. Anyone with half some sense would look at it like that. I'll also kindly ask you to refrain from personal attacks, as not doing so will get you blocked. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 01:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
Ah getting a little cut are we? you are on the back foot man, stop before you embarrass yourslef further. You obvioulsy have nothing on me becuase you are resorting to commenting on my typing and/or spelling. What did you do, run my text through a spellchecker? "oooh i got the dirt on you now, mwa hahahahah, you spelt a word wrong, i am going to so point that out to you and then everyone will laugh at you! then maybe i will be popular and people will respect me"
No, I'm not getting a little cut. It appears YOU are the one getting cut with your personal attacks, which is "the dirt I have on you." I would warn you again, but I'm sure you'll be blocked by the end of the day. I don't think I could embarrass myself to the degree of which you embarrassed yourself asking that incredibly irrelevant question. If you don't have a credible question to ask, you shouldn't have even come to the talkpage. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 15:45, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I wish you could see how funny this is. "I'm not cut, you are". think of some better come backs and maybe i will shut up. also people don't get blocked for objecting to being labeled a liar, people get blocked for calling people liars. Just puttin' that out there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.156.66.110 (talk) 09:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Gentlemen - If you're going to continue this, could you please do so somewhere else. This page is for discussing the article not for personal disagreements. Thank you. - X201 09:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Dude I'm trying to point out the fact that 1. that was an unnecessary question that shouldn't have been asked because it's pretty obvious he was not from Rockstar and 2. if personal attacks don't stop, then he could be blocked, which has happened plenty of times in the past. Of course, I'll quit, but I just wanted to point that out. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 20:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Do i detect a note of pleading in your tone? oh ok this has gone on for long enough i suppose. Been nice talking to you. perhaps i will actually sign this time instead of relying on the bot. 202.156.66.110 08:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Taxibepot.jpg

Image:Taxibepot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:38, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that I've addressed this correctly - link was pointing to wrong article - but could someone else double check the rest of the Fair Use Rational to make sure, thanks - X201 08:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I've added information in the fair-use rationale template to be certain it has everything needed. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 11:36, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wii Version?

Does anyone know anything about a wii version for this game? Considering the wii's market penetration, someone has to be talking about it.--Cms479 20:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

lol no —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.67.21 (talk) 03:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Haven't heard anything. Not impossible with the Wii but wouldn't look anything like the PS3/360 versions. - X201 22:23, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
WP:FORUM. When a Wii version is mentioned in reliable, third party sources, then it can be mentioned in the article. John Hayestalk 01:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Just because it has market penetration doesn't mean it can automatically run good games. Heyooooooo.Darkwarriorblake 07:50, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Instalment?

Some person placed a comment after the word 'instalment', claiming that no one is allowed to change it because this article should be written exclusively in Brit-speak and that we should refer to the discussion page for reasons why. Well, there is no discussion on this issue, and there's no real reason to leave the word spelled in this idiotic way; therefore, I'm changing it and removing the insipid comment which follows. If someone would like to disagree with me, I'd love to actually have a debate about it. Rodeosmurf 16:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

The debate (short that it was) is in the archives. It is Wikipedia policy for articles to be written in one consistent form of English ,be it US, Australian or GB English. GTA is British in origin and the article has been written in GB English from the start and so has every right to stay as GB English. WP:ENGVAR has the full explanation of WP Policy on the mater of regional language variations. If you want a debate about it here is not the place, that should be on the WP:MOS discussion page. - X201 16:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
There, how about that [1] as an alternative? - X201 17:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps this should be put somewhere at the top of the page, but for anyone who is looking Here is the discussion. It wasn't really much of a debate (as X201 said) as the article had already been established as using british English, it was merely explaining why. The main reason is WP:ENGVAR which basically says to use the established version of English. No variant is "idiotic".. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 17:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Welp, looks like I've chumped myself out once again. Sorry bros. Anyway, I think that spelling everything in Brit-speak because it's a British game is an absurd policy, but I'll take those complaints to the appropriate page. Rodeosmurf 00:22, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Just remember to look at it from the other side of the fence. By changing one side that then makes it absurd from the other side. European users have to cope with US date format , -ize instead of -ise, words that we don't use, like faucet, trash and realtor, forms of grammar that "Don't look right, already" plus countless other differences that we have between ourselves, yet, I have to say (and this is not personally aimed at you Rodeosmurf, it's just my observation), it always seems to be the US users that complain and want everything "their way". - X201 09:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Rodeosmurf, it's not so much about being a British game (I'm not sure how I would justify that), it's just that the article was created in British English, and according to WP:ENGVAR it needs a strong reason to change it, which hasn't been justified either. John Hayestalk 12:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Manhattan

"Manhattan" is not the name of a Native American tribe. "Manahatta" means "Island of Hills" in a Native American language. That's where the name comes from. 192.128.166.68 21:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I have removed it. ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 21:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Big W Confirmation of a March 15 2008 Australian Realese Date?

Can be found as the last sentence, under the Grand Theft Auto IV heading.

Can anyone clarify this as genuine, with a clear reliable source?... otherwise I'm going to delete it, since it very much seems unreliable & very likely wrong.

Thank you.

--Jas315 04:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

The chairman of Take 2 said the other day they won't commit to a date until they know they can hit it. So until they say otherwise, I wouldn't trust other sources.►Chris NelsonHolla! 04:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

At what time period does this game take place?

Has it been revealed the year the game's plot takes place? Doppelganger 01:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

2007.►Chris NelsonHolla! 01:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Erm... as far as I know this has never been confirmed, it would appear to be "present day". John Hayestalk 12:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I figured there would be a source out by now. There isn't? ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 22:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Input method should be more specific (that is X360 joypad and Sixaxis/DualShock3) and some other things

I think the input should be those two things. And the developer is not only Rockstar North, but also Rockstar San Diego (engine), Rockstar NYC (voicework, other stuff). Basically its a whole bunch of Rockstar studios working together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.250.17.124 (talk) 11:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide a source which confirms the input methods are those things. For all we know (for arguments sake) Rockstar will bring out a special GTA controller. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrphayes (talk • contribs) 12:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

And I don't consider Voice work or providing an engine as being a developer. Developer, funnily, develops the game.Darkwarriorblake 17:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


We could "assume" it will be those methods. But then it wouldnt be fact:) But how is then a fact that they will be on DVD and BluRay? What if its on CD:) Joke.

The presentation demos for the magazines were done on an xbox 360 with the x360 controller. They havent shown the PS3 version to anyone except Take2 execs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.95.200.74 (talk) 16:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

New Boxart and Trailer 3

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/28353.html

This video contains the boxart for GTAIV, Release date for Trailer 3 "Move Up, Ladies" (12.06.07).Adthisisliving (talk) 20:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you find a picture to put up, if it hasn't been done so? ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 01:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I've fixed the Fair use rational - old rational was for logo. - X201 (talk) 09:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Citing Removal

I'm not sure as to Wikipedia's rules regarding this (if there are any), but could any of the cites be removed? For example, some of the more unneccesary ones, like things that have been known and undisputed for several months now. They make the lines farther spaced apart and kind of make the page look ugly, don't you think? Obviously some need to be there, but something like the game being on Xbox 360 doesn't really need citing, does it? Unless you're mentally ill, I suppose. 12.107.247.187 (talk) 03:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. If you're referring to citation number 1, that reference also includes release date info which is often challenged (hence the message to not change it without a source). ●BillPP (talk|contribs) 10:45, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Citations aren't removed after a certain amount of time, if a statement requires a reference then it should stay. I wouldn't say they are ugly, and they are an integral part of Wikipedia. John Hayestalk 01:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright. I've just noticed some citings all across Wikipedia that are ... well absolutely useless. For example the three citings of R* being the producer of GTA 3. Does anyone not believe this? Are there people out there going "Well they have cites, though I'm still a bit skeptical"? 12.107.246.204 02:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The whole reason for citing facts is so that people who have no knowledge at all of the subject can check up the facts used to create it. More than one source is good because it acts as redundancy for dead links. - X201 16:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Version of English

Shouldn't this article be written in American English instead of British English? For example 'aeroplane' vs 'airplane.' The game takes place in a fictional version of New York in the United States and is being developed by Rockstar Games (based out of New York) and published by Take-Two Interactive (also based out of New York). Just a thought. 71.75.103.239 20:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The subject doesn't determine the type of English the article will use. A while back, the article contained a majoritiy of British English, so a majority of editors decided to change the entire article to British English to help avoid edit conflicts. ♣ Klptyzm Chat wit' me § Contributions ♣ 20:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

And its also developed by a company in the United Kingdom. American Rockstar only publishes.Darkwarriorblake 21:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Rockstar North is British, and so are most of the rude jokes in the games. mattbuck 21:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grand_Theft_Auto_IV/Archive_5&oldid=1146493469"