Talk:Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

GTA Myths

The article is missing a new feature SA brought in. The myths. The first serious had a little detail into myths with blue hell, but it was hard to explore, the VC had helicopters which allowed a lot more exploration, but it never picked off in the mainstream, SA on the other hand has sprung a huge arena of myth related topics.

I'm going to add some edits to myth related features, as well as some old myth related sites that I can grab.

If anyone has a problem with it being on the main page[though I do feel this is where it belongs], I can put it on a seperate sheet and just put up a link exchange.

~capi crimm.

Myths

• Bigfoot
• Serial Killer, face him on jungle
• Big creature in deep sea
• Mama's CJ ghost
• ET contact

Real

• Random writings in Los Santos cemetery at night.
• Light balls passing in the sky
• Ghostcar (an car nobody inside descend a mount)
• Liberty City (with cheats)

---

I cleaned stuff up a lot and added more info. Let me know what you think!
Oh, and I think maybe the box art ought to be deleted - it's copyrighted. --Twinxor 08:15, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think the box art is released into the public domain. cun 16:16, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Why would the box art be in the public domain? I'm removing it. --Twinxor 17:29, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

But you have a fine case for fair use, so I've changed the status on the image. --Twinxor 17:40, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, cd covers are all around this place and are even instigated by Wikipedia, so why wouldn't ps2 covers be legal too?

* They are legal, it's fair use. It doesn't diminish the owner's ability to sell, and is not a work of art meant to be sold as is.

Table

I see in the table the person has listed players 1-2. That's kinda mean. The people who haven't seen the leaked covers yet (all 1 of them) will be shocked. --TIB (talk) 02:09, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

Why is it mean? The release is only a few days away. I wonder if it's even real, I doubt San Andreas will have multiplayer abilities. -- Sander 09:02, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Players of the leaked version claim that it will. See [1]. --GatesPlusPlus 14:07, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I read it on [[2]] yesterday. Sounds like an interesting idea. -- Sander 17:32, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Not officially confirmed, but there's co-op in a couple places. --Twinxor 18:10, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well now it's out and it's in the game there's no need to change it is there? --Vanguard 20:07, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Are the ratings in the table reversed? It says AO for original rating and M for re-release. I believe that is backwards. Juggaleaux 04:07, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

At present, San Andreas has been reverted to an M rating after the version of the game with the sex minigame removed indefinitely was released, from an AO rating during the Hot Coffee incident. Unless there are intentions to include all three ratings (pre-Hot Coffee (M), Hot Coffee (AO) and post-Hot Coffee (M)), the current version is the best way to describe the current change of ratings. ╫ 25 ^ring-a-ding 10:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC) ╫

Release Date Dispute

It's Oct 26, stop changing it phillip. gamespot still says 26. --TIB (talk) 05:09, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)

And the Australian release date is 29, who changed that? I've put it back. edgeworth 10:49, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

DVD Size

I dispute the dvd is a DVD9. Reports from everyone tell me its a DVD5. If someone has the dvd and can toss it in their DVD-ROM, right click/properties, and screenshot the size, that would help greatly. --69.92.23.31 02:18, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm sure I've read people (on www.gtaforums.com) having older PS2's who have trouble playing it, because it's dual-layer, meaning it's DVD9. Also, in one of the older interviews with Rockstar, they said San Andreas would he too big to fit on one side, so they expanded it even more to fit a dual-layer disc. -- Sander 08:59, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

DVD properties screenshot -Rjo 09:26, Nov 12, 2004 (UTC)

It's a DVD5, contains 4.3 GB of data --Mateusc 00:09, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It's a dual-layer one, they said so in about a million interviews Ian Moody 18:26, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

No. It's DVD5. --Mateusc 05:10, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Please state scources prooving your point! Hakusa - Wiki addict: 01

32, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

While I don't have it for the PC, so I can't, I do recognise that it is probably a DVD9. But if you think otherwise proove it either by linking a site or any other creative idea; because right now it sounds like a bunch of uninformed opinions.

The PS2 game seems to be a single-layer DVD. When tossed in a PC, it shows 4500 MB of data (or 4300 MiB, if you prefer), divided as follow :

17M ./data

1091M ./models

1M ./system

4M ./text

259M ./anim

2878M ./audio

41M ./movies

(In fact, quite strangely, San Andreas is a a bit smaller than Vice city !)

Cable cars

I'm removing the reference to being able to steal the cable car in SF. So far I've found no confirmation that it can be stolen. -Sean Curtin 03:19, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)

Your right about that, it just goes around in a loop never stopping and is impossible to steal.--Vanguard 20:11, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Trolleys can't be jacked. Trains is what was being reffered to.

The original reference was: San Fierro features Rockstar's interpretations of the Haight-Ashbury district, Chinatown, and the Golden Gate Bridge, as well as cable cars which can be stolen. No reference to trains here, and the stealable trains are already mentioned in the article. -Sean Curtin 23:59, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)

No what I ment was that Trolleys got mixed up with Trains in some of message boards. A few other things got exagerated like that as well

Yeah, a lot of things got conflated like that in the older versions of the article - even a few weeks after the game came out, there were still claims here that CJ could go up to any person on the street and talk to them, etc. -Sean Curtin 06:30, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

But isn't that true, in a manner of speaking? Anyone you bump into can talk to you, and you can respond. 137.148.52.254 20:19, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Is impossible to steal and stop these cable cars and the appears it is pure randomly.

Votes for deletion results

The article, Glory Hole Theme Park, was listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion in accordance with the deletion policy on 03:16, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC). The result of this nomination was merge and redirect. Please see this page's entry for archive of the debate. -- AllyUnion (talk) 22:33, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Links to Gamespot

Is it just me, or are half of the links about stuff to Gamespot? Seems wrong / unrequired. Scumbag June 29, 2005 08:26 (UTC)

Not only that, but the images linked to don't work. All those links need to be taken out of the article. --Marcg106 18:49, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Walkthrough

I think we should write a walkthrough for San Andreas on the Wiki. It would be an interesting project seeing everyones ideas for completing each mission one by one. Perhaps even put each mission on seperate pages and let people add their own ways of completing the mission. Moitio 22:08, 02 July 2005 (UTC)

Are you aware that Wikibooks is well underway into this very thing. Walkthroughs don't belong on Wikipedia, but Wikibooks is perfect for them. Check it out! --TheDotGamer ^Talk July 3, 2005 00:23 (UTC)

Ah right, thanks, I wasn't aware of that. --Moitio July 4, 2005 23:18 (UTC)

Character Criticisms

I was going to add the following text to "Criticisms", but it occurred to me that it might not be a neutral POV. Opinions?

Another criticized aspect of the game is Carl Johnson (the playable character) himself. In previous GTA games (except Vice City), the playable character was mute with little to no character development. As such, a person could kill random people in the game without compromising their own morals, stating that such actions would be done by the character anyway. In Vice City, the main character had dialogue and an established personality. Tommy Vercetti (the character) was portrayed as a brutal killer, being released from prison shortly before the game's events. However, Johnson is portrayed as a nice guy who's caught up with the wrong crowd; who only does what's necessary. Certainly, killing innocent people on the street isn't necessary. In essence, when one is playing the game (and not doing missions), anything one does cannot be credited to CJ, but to the player.

--Zeromaru 5 July 2005 21:46 (UTC)

Meh, seems OK to me. --Jacj 06:57, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what this section is trying to say. Is the criticism of the fact that CJ is a more developed character than the playable characters in other GTA games, which makes it harder to reconcile the player's (possibly, but likely) amoral tendencies with his "good guy" nature? Or is the criticism of Carl's personality and character itself? It just isn't quite registering for me. -DynSkeet (talk) 21:01, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

It's the former. CJ doesn't seem like the kind of guy that would do have the stuff you do when not on a mission. --Zeromaru 00:56, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Then don't do the stuff when not on a mission... --84.173.243.25 01:23, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Well, I don't think ANY of the characters from GTA III, VC or SA would just go up to someone in the streets and shoot them in the head (stress relief, perhaps?) If CJ had principles, he wouldn't have killed hundreds of people during missions. The game seems to contradict itself, no?

This part should either be rewritten or deleted, IMHO. First, I'm not even sure it makes sense. Or rather, I'm not sure it's valid. Second, I don't believe it's a common complaint or criticism. Am I rite? --Wedge 05:52, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I am sick of this, why don't you people just come out and complain about the fact that CJ is black. You people would prefer that the main character in San Andreas had not have been an african-american. I don't think you racists would complain about CJ so much if he was white.

Please. No personal attacks. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 20:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC) ╫

I don't think that part is necessary in the article, but it still brings up a valid observation. I noticed that while playing, you can murder people, steal cars, and whatever other wanton acts of violence with not a hint of hesitation, but the personality the game displays shows one much more reserved and less prone to have absolutely no compassion for strangers on the street. One example I found noticable was that throughout the game, there are tons of references to drugs, and CJ is offered them numerous times, however he always refuses them. It's a conflicting message, sort of, or maybe it's meant to draw contrast to the fact that the wanton violence you can do is really just playing around in a game. Agonotheta 10:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Hot Coffee

(The below coments have been copied and pasted from the above topic, where they did not belong.) I'm an avid fan of the GTA games and don't consider myself a prude, but there's a screenshot of the hot coffee mod which I reckon should be removed. I'm not usually one for censorship but it just looks tacky or childish to have it there. I'm sure if someone wants to know what it looks like they can find screenshots by a link or something, not have it shoved in their face like that.

Normally, I'd agree, if I didn't have to look closely at the picture in order to pick out what's going on. Really, it's crude, but leaves much to the imagination of children. Really makes you wonder how THAT scene gave it AO. --Zeromaru 01:34, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

I also think that the link to the "Hot coffee cheats" should be removed too. -- 24.90.128.71 00:47 00:47, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Hakusa - Wiki addict: 01:45, September 8, 2005 (UTC) - Do I think Rockstar should have done hot coffee to begin with? No. But does that make the game deserve an AO rating? I don\'t think so.In risk of having a POV, I think had hotcoffe been conciously available by rockstar, then AO would have been OK, but the fact that only a hacker (To hack: an ILEGAL event unwich usualy a programer gets into a program and changes it.), or a moder could have accesed it. The fact is, someone could have just as easily put that in the game anyways. I do, however agree it should have been taken out of the game, and don't think the AO rating should have been on the console version because having a moded Xbox or PS2 is far more illegal that game hacking, and the only way to access the content on a console is owning a moded one.

Pretty stupid, but this is an encyclopedia, so we can't deconstruct the arguments that the fact that it was even considered means the game should have an AO. Way I see it is if it isn't accessable in an unmodified release copy, it is user created content. Hackers or no. -- Fergdude33 22:44, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Initially, Rockstar released a statement that strongly suggested that the Hot Coffee content was entirely created by "hackers". However, this claim was undermined when codes were released on web forums for the PlayStation 2 Gameshark and AR Max cheating devices that demonstrated that the controversial content was, indeed, built into the console versions.

The above text from the article is all nonsense. Their initial press release said, "So far we have learned that the "hot coffee" modification is the work of a determined group of hackers who have gone to significant trouble to alter scenes in the official version of the game. In violation of the software user agreement, hackers created the "hot coffee" modification by disassembling and then combining, recompiling and altering the game's source code. Since the "hot coffee" scenes cannot be created without intentional and significant technical modifications and reverse engineering of the game's source code, we are currently investigating ways that we can increase the security protection of the source code and prevent the game from being altered by the "hot coffee" modification."

The wiki article text author is either confusing the issue, doesn't fully understand the argument, or both. --Wedge 06:56, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Bigfoot

"Shortly after the release of the game, several message boards, and one very enthusiastic member of Neoseeker.com (DMC24guy), sprouted claims of alleged Bigfoot sightings, and several alleged photographs were released, all of which have been proven to be either faked or the result of mistaken identity by his leading critic (The Assassin). After the initial claim, many other people came to its defense, and many fan communities were divided on the claim's truth. Then a few months after the controversy died down, DMC24guy began to make new claims that The Assassin was his accomplice all along. This claim was later proven to be false after The Assassin posted a screen shot of a private message from DMC24guy, admitting that The Assassin infact had nothing to do with creating the Bigfoot Saga. However just recently (October 2005) DMC24guy has made yet more claims. This time he says that he IS infact The Assassin himself. Unfortunately for DMC24guy, The Assassin posted ANOTHER screen shot of a private message which totally discredits DMC24guy's claims. DMC24guy was infact asking The Assassin to help him concoct another "saga" on Neoseeker.com in an attempt to make himself known to the gaming world even more so. However, this time the chances of succeeding are quiet slim obviously."

This is a quote under the Myths and Easter eggs heading. In my opinion, I do not see the relevance between members of a GTA forum being discussed on the Grand Theft Auto: San Andrea’s entry. Granted, the Big Foot myths surfaced. However, this looks like a publicity stunt by a member of an online community. It also looks like an online battle between two members of a community. A quibble between online communities and their members does not bear any relevance to this article. It should be rephrased, if not removed. Please give your opinions to this entry. Please use the `proper format for requesting support in order to ensure that you receive support. Ajwebb 03:20, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. I think it should be removed, too. Replace it w/ one sentence... something like, "Some morons claim to have seen Bigfoot in the game, but they are either mistaken or dumb." That's all you need. --Wedge 05:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree as well. I am going to delete the section considering that the wording of the passage is unclear and several sentences seem to contradict themselves if not make any sense at all. If one can rewrite the passage in a more coherent way go ahead. --Offkilter 22:12, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Pretty obviously added in by DMC24guy himself, he's a bear for self-promotionDaigo 13:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

Some parts of the article needs cleanup, wikilinks and realocate sections (Gangs in San Andreas world?) --Mateusc 01:43, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I have to agree. This article is a mess. I found it particularly intimidating to read long sections like the Myths and Easter eggs section, plus the recent lengthy addition on gangs can be merged into a new article listing all gangs in the GTA series. The Law Enforcement Agencies section is totally unnecessary, though; the same types of law enforcers can be seen in most GTA games. ╫ 25 ^ring-a-ding 03:30, 13 October 2005 (UTC) ╫

I agree as well. The Myths and Easter eggs section needs quite a bit of work done. There are other sections of this article that needs to be improved as well. I would have to agree with the ideas mentioned above. Ajwebb 00:04, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Bigfoot Is True.

Area 69

Was Area 69 named as a reference to the 69 sex position? --SuperDude 06:08, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Yep. It's RockStar, what else would it be for? The Wookieepedian 02:02, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't just apply to Area 69. The number "69" is pretty much everywhere in San Andreas: as runway numbers, price tags and even San Fierro's football team name (the 69ers). ╫ 25 ^ring-a-ding 11:39, 21 December 2005 (UTC) ╫

i agree with him its prolbily related the position 69

Yes, it is probably a referance to this, but maybe also relating it to Area 51, and the supposed sightings of aliens in Roswell. Maybe they mean this to be a referance to a place where sightings of people having sex in the 69 position? Or it too is an area of alien movement.

• • Area 51 has absolutely no correction to Roswell. The two locations are not even in the same state, and the Roswell incident occurred 8 years before Area 51 (the base) even existed.Crazed actor 20:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Keyboard comment

The following line is in the main article:

Many users have discovered that a mission requires the user to press three or more keys at the same time, something the typical keyboard is simply unable to do.

This would suggest that there are "atypical" keyboards that are able to handle three or more pressed keys at a time. Are there keyboards like this, and if there aren't, should this reference be removed?

Yes, there is such keyboards. Older keyboards like mine have the tendency to support a limited combination of simultaneous keyboard presses. The same problem exists when I play GTA III and Vice City, but with less interference with game play. One (strange) example that I can point out is inability to steer left (with the left key) in a vehicle while holding the accelerator (up key) and horn keys (H key), but could still steer right (right key). ╫ 25 ^ring-a-ding 14:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC) ╫

---

But then on WCTR, why is the radio program of that... paranormal dude named Area 53? The Runescape Junkie 02:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Modified contradictory statement

A new criticism of San Andreas lies in its camera. Previous editions of GTA games had the camera 'slaved' to the player. In San Andreas, however, the camera is freeform. As such, many have complained that this new 'feature' makes much of the controls more complex than is required. There is an in-game cheat that allows players to drive-by through using the mouse camera, but doing so will harm your record in the in-game statistics. However, you can still fully complete the game. This is not a widely spread complaint, and the freeform camera is a very powerful tool once the player is used to using it, and some find it difficult to go back to the fixed camera of Vice City and GTA3 afterwards.

I have modified the above statement as it is self contradictory. First it says 'many have complained', then it says this is not a widespread complaint. In matters such as this, it is very difficult to ascertain how many have this problem. So unless you can point to a scientific poll of people who have tried GTA:SA and show either way, I suggest we leave it more neutral as I have tried. That is, we should not try to indicate what percentage of users have or don't have this complaint (many, not wide spread etc). Nil Einne 11:08, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Where is the police chopper?

were is it\

---

On top of a police station in Los Santos I saw one.

RandallFlagg Scotland 16:18, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

So what exactly happened to San Andreas after the controversy?

well?

Pece Kocovski 06:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

haha WHICH controversy? The Hot Coffee mod thing died down after Rockstar recalled all units not yet sold and removed the scene. As of now, however, they are being sued again for the Hot Coffee thing by someone (forget details) in Los Angeles. The case is pending

The new version Rockstar put out was made to be mod-proof, however people who have it have gotten around this by using a cracked exe made of the old version. Agonotheta

Plane Crashes

Several WWII planes crash occasionally throughout San Andreas, and disappear seconds after doing so. Those that occur most often are crashes into Mt. Chilliad. Crashes also take place in other areas, including the lowland. This was programmed intentionally by Rockstar to add a feel of realism.

How is it realistic to have WWII-era fighters repeatedly crashing into the city and disappearing moments later? Seems to me that the final sentence in the above quote is the conclusion of the user that added it and not Rockstar's official stance on the issue. It's more likely that the crashes are simply poor pathfinder AI colliding violently with terrain mapping. If no one objects, I'm going to edit that bit to make it less certain of unconfirmed "facts". TKarrde 23:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Seconded the change. This looks more of a user observation, and I believe that the crashes should apply to more airplanes, aside "WWII planes". ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 07:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC) ╫

I think I read somewhere that the plane crashes were a mistake with the programming, but they liked it and kept it in. I'll try to find it. Corky842 05:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

A step further

• Do people still edit this article? I've read it and I think is quite good. I'm gonna request a peer review to see if we can make it a Featured Article.Nnfolz 17:53, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Aliens

a minor thing but evidence for aliens in the in game world also includes the announcements made on the PA system in the area 69 underground bunker

Missions

Does anyone think about making a separate page in Wiki for all of the storyline missions in San Andreas? There might have been talk about this already, I'm just expressing my view.

I'm not sure about this proposition. Creating an article about a game's storyline and missions is not usually standard procedure in Wikipedia, though I do see that this sort of content as absolutely perfect in the game's Wikibooks entry in a Storyline section or the likes. ╫ ２５ ^{◀RingADing▶} 16:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC) ╫

Delisted GA

Hi. I have removed this article from the Wikipedia:Good article listing due to the following:

• No references. One of the GA criteria is that the article must have a references section. Inline citations are preferred but not required. When this has been addressed, please feel free to re-nominate. Thanks! Air.dance 03:59, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Rockstar quote needs verfiying

This line needs verifying or deleting:

Rockstar has since vowed legal action against any subsequent sources that reveal how to access this part of the game, mainly cheat device code sites.

Where is this announcement from Rockstar? The creator of GTA: SA Censor Remover, the only tool to enable Hot Coffee on all versions of the original game, certainly hasn't been contacted as an update was recently released. Unless evidenced the line in question should be removed from the article as it may be speculation at best.

April 13th Car Chase

This article was posted on GameSpot:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6147626.html

Could anyone please write about this article in the Controversies section, and put the link into the Resources section? Thanks. Hoodie 11:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Clean up, isle wikipedia

This page is horrible! It reads like a 9 year olds badly constructed geocities gta fansite! 202.191.106.230 04:50, 19 April 2006 (UTC)