|QUOTE (Bonfy @ Sunday, Jan 20 2013, 12:02)|
| Why you're saying that it's unlikely that the map will have that size? Just curious. It looks just fine to me. |
Yeah, who knows, could be that the longer you look at it, the better it looks.
It's more about the city/country ratio than the map size itself. I think the overall expectation in this thread was that relative to the city, there should be more countryside (both discovered and undiscovered) than on that map.
|QUOTE (LotusRIP @ Sunday, Jan 20 2013, 12:17)|
| How about we not jump to mathematics and formulas until we know exactly what the map looks like and can make an accurate comparison. You're comparing maps to something we haven't even seen. |
But aren't we doing that all the time? Noone has ever really seen the territory on GTAKiwi's map, still we think that's how it looks. Noone has ever really seen Grauman's Chinese Theatre, still we know it's there. (The Ancient Greeks knew the Earth was a sphere more than 2000 years before anyone had seen it, etc.) All this is based on the estimation of angles and distances and perspectives. So I guess if R* throw us a bone ("V = 5 x RDR", which is precisely "comparing maps to something we haven't even seen"), we can't just ignore that.
And I think one could just as well say: "How about we not jump to drawing lines and boxes and mountain shapes until we know exactly what the correct scale of the map is and how the optics of the screenshots work and can prove all that mathematically or with an accurate 3D model."