rockstar vet says gta 3 was a mess for most of dev, story was secondary. got me thinking about gta 6

Saw this quote from a Rockstar veteran talking about GTA 3's development and it kind of hit me. He said for most of development the game was in a sorry state, and the rule was simple. If something was fun, it went in. Story came second.

That's wild to think about now. GTA 3 basically invented the open world crime game template we're all still playing. And the whole time they were just throwing stuff at the wall to see what stuck. No grand narrative plan, just vibes and fun mechanics.

I keep coming back to that with GTA 6 less than a month out. Rockstar's been cooking this thing for years, and we've seen how polished everything looks. But I wonder if that old philosophy still drives them. The trailers show a lot of story stuff with Lucia and Jason, and the world looks insanely detailed. But is the core loop still "if it's fun, it's in"? Or have they become more careful, more narrative first?

We all know GTA 5 had a huge story, but the most memorable parts were the random chaos, the side activities, the dumb stuff you could do for hours. If Rockstar kept that GTA 3 mindset, GTA 6 might be even better than we're expecting. But if they overcorrected toward cinematic storytelling, we might lose some of that sandbox magic.

I'm not worried, honestly. Rockstar rarely misses. But this quote made me realize how much of what I love about GTA came from a team that was just messing around and keeping what worked. Does that still happen in a studio making a game this massive?

What do you all think? Do you believe Rockstar still designs GTA games with fun first and story second, or has that flipped for GTA 6?

---

Source: GamesRadar+ · Curated content.