Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Mapping Los Santos! Building/landmark analysis

26,232 replies to this topic
Dope_0110
  • Dope_0110

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#15901

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:15 AM

QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:01)
QUOTE (jfavignano @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:37)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

No

Sorry, but I'm with him. The fanmade maps seem to be pretty accurate. And they indeed look pretty small. We already know the northern end of the map. I am not bitching or trolling, but I'm really disappointed about the map so far. I just can not imagine how the landmass can be as big as R* told us. I think they overestimated the mapsize themselves. They always show us the Alamo Sea or hills around Alamo Sea from different angles. And I am really afraid that the map will not be bigger than that. LS, Alamo Sea and some big Mountains around it which will fill most of map-space. I hope I'm wrong but.... since we know the map ends just north of Alamo Sea... well... I just expected more for the biggest and most ambitious game R* ever created. They just promised sooooo much...!

SA had tons of farms ... forests, vegetation, desert, rivers, diversity, tons of small towns and settlements... not as beautiful as current gen but awesome for 2005... GTA V has shown us desert, a huge sea, 3 towns, a vineyard and some very huge mountains,... no forests, no other towns, no greenery, no vegetation, no places faaaar away from Alamo Sea or LS, no other lakes or rivers confused.gif ... yes it will have more features than all other GTA-games, but I am very disappointed with the map so far. Don't need other cities! But it seems to be just... small and not diverse. Everything seems to happen around LS, Zancudo River and Alamo Sea. I just hope R* is hiding tons of the map.

Yes. Customization, Gameplay, Activities, Story, Weapons... R* puts tons of energy in this game, but... Well... I personally just don't like the map so far. confused.gif

Please go to youtube, type ''San Andreas Draw Distance mod'' in the search box and watch some of the videos that you get. Then you will see what would SA really look like it if had the same drawing distance as V, and you'd also see how small it seems because of that.

un94
  • un94

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2012

#15902

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:21 AM Edited by un94, 20 July 2013 - 12:28 AM.

QUOTE (Dope_0110 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:15)
QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:01)
QUOTE (jfavignano @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:37)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

No

Sorry, but I'm with him. The fanmade maps seem to be pretty accurate. And they indeed look pretty small. We already know the northern end of the map. I am not bitching or trolling, but I'm really disappointed about the map so far. I just can not imagine how the landmass can be as big as R* told us. I think they overestimated the mapsize themselves. They always show us the Alamo Sea or hills around Alamo Sea from different angles. And I am really afraid that the map will not be bigger than that. LS, Alamo Sea and some big Mountains around it which will fill most of map-space. I hope I'm wrong but.... since we know the map ends just north of Alamo Sea... well... I just expected more for the biggest and most ambitious game R* ever created. They just promised sooooo much...!

SA had tons of farms ... forests, vegetation, desert, rivers, diversity, tons of small towns and settlements... not as beautiful as current gen but awesome for 2005... GTA V has shown us desert, a huge sea, 3 towns, a vineyard and some very huge mountains,... no forests, no other towns, no greenery, no vegetation, no places faaaar away from Alamo Sea or LS, no other lakes or rivers confused.gif ... yes it will have more features than all other GTA-games, but I am very disappointed with the map so far. Don't need other cities! But it seems to be just... small and not diverse. Everything seems to happen around LS, Zancudo River and Alamo Sea. I just hope R* is hiding tons of the map.

Yes. Customization, Gameplay, Activities, Story, Weapons... R* puts tons of energy in this game, but... Well... I personally just don't like the map so far. confused.gif

Please go to youtube, type ''San Andreas Draw Distance mod'' in the search box and watch some of the videos that you get. Then you will see what would SA really look like it if had the same drawing distance as V, and you'd also see how small it seems because of that.

You are right, it's technically VERY small. But it just FELT big and diverse. And I am afraid GTA V won't feel big. It's countryside seems to be a big lake, some big hills and three or four towns and a vineyard. It looks awesome, yes. But.... No forests, greenery, less towns and so on.

One of those Mountains around Alamo Sea fills tons of space on the map of GTA SA. So it will be easy for GTA V to be way bigger than SA. But I'm talking about diversity... SA looks ugly nowadays, but it feels very diverse in my opinion.

Dope_0110
  • Dope_0110

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#15903

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:26 AM

QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:21)
QUOTE (Dope_0110 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:15)
QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:01)
QUOTE (jfavignano @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:37)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

No

Sorry, but I'm with him. The fanmade maps seem to be pretty accurate. And they indeed look pretty small. We already know the northern end of the map. I am not bitching or trolling, but I'm really disappointed about the map so far. I just can not imagine how the landmass can be as big as R* told us. I think they overestimated the mapsize themselves. They always show us the Alamo Sea or hills around Alamo Sea from different angles. And I am really afraid that the map will not be bigger than that. LS, Alamo Sea and some big Mountains around it which will fill most of map-space. I hope I'm wrong but.... since we know the map ends just north of Alamo Sea... well... I just expected more for the biggest and most ambitious game R* ever created. They just promised sooooo much...!

SA had tons of farms ... forests, vegetation, desert, rivers, diversity, tons of small towns and settlements... not as beautiful as current gen but awesome for 2005... GTA V has shown us desert, a huge sea, 3 towns, a vineyard and some very huge mountains,... no forests, no other towns, no greenery, no vegetation, no places faaaar away from Alamo Sea or LS, no other lakes or rivers confused.gif ... yes it will have more features than all other GTA-games, but I am very disappointed with the map so far. Don't need other cities! But it seems to be just... small and not diverse. Everything seems to happen around LS, Zancudo River and Alamo Sea. I just hope R* is hiding tons of the map.

Yes. Customization, Gameplay, Activities, Story, Weapons... R* puts tons of energy in this game, but... Well... I personally just don't like the map so far. confused.gif

Please go to youtube, type ''San Andreas Draw Distance mod'' in the search box and watch some of the videos that you get. Then you will see what would SA really look like it if had the same drawing distance as V, and you'd also see how small it seems because of that.

You are right, it's technically VERY small. But it just FELT big and diverse. And I am afraid GTA V won't feel big. It's countryside seems to be a big lake, some big hills and three or four towns and a vineyard. It looks awesome, yes. But.... No forests, greenery, less towns and so on.

I just wanted to show you how a map as small as SA's (compared to V's, which is obvious if you compare those videos of SA to V screenshots) felt so big. Now, if SA map managed to feel so big, why would you even start to worry a map as big as V's won't. When you're on the ground, driving or walking, only then will you truly understand how big this map is. And if they managed to put in so much variety in SA, what makes you thing there's not any of that in V. You have forests, lake, mountains, deserts, trailer park, small towns, farms.. just like SA, and all in a much bigger scale. And then there's all the parts of map we didn't exactly see yet.

un94
  • un94

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2012

#15904

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:34 AM Edited by un94, 20 July 2013 - 12:37 AM.

QUOTE (Dope_0110 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:26)
QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:21)
QUOTE (Dope_0110 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:15)
QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:01)
QUOTE (jfavignano @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:37)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

No

Sorry, but I'm with him. The fanmade maps seem to be pretty accurate. And they indeed look pretty small. We already know the northern end of the map. I am not bitching or trolling, but I'm really disappointed about the map so far. I just can not imagine how the landmass can be as big as R* told us. I think they overestimated the mapsize themselves. They always show us the Alamo Sea or hills around Alamo Sea from different angles. And I am really afraid that the map will not be bigger than that. LS, Alamo Sea and some big Mountains around it which will fill most of map-space. I hope I'm wrong but.... since we know the map ends just north of Alamo Sea... well... I just expected more for the biggest and most ambitious game R* ever created. They just promised sooooo much...!

SA had tons of farms ... forests, vegetation, desert, rivers, diversity, tons of small towns and settlements... not as beautiful as current gen but awesome for 2005... GTA V has shown us desert, a huge sea, 3 towns, a vineyard and some very huge mountains,... no forests, no other towns, no greenery, no vegetation, no places faaaar away from Alamo Sea or LS, no other lakes or rivers confused.gif ... yes it will have more features than all other GTA-games, but I am very disappointed with the map so far. Don't need other cities! But it seems to be just... small and not diverse. Everything seems to happen around LS, Zancudo River and Alamo Sea. I just hope R* is hiding tons of the map.

Yes. Customization, Gameplay, Activities, Story, Weapons... R* puts tons of energy in this game, but... Well... I personally just don't like the map so far. confused.gif

Please go to youtube, type ''San Andreas Draw Distance mod'' in the search box and watch some of the videos that you get. Then you will see what would SA really look like it if had the same drawing distance as V, and you'd also see how small it seems because of that.

You are right, it's technically VERY small. But it just FELT big and diverse. And I am afraid GTA V won't feel big. It's countryside seems to be a big lake, some big hills and three or four towns and a vineyard. It looks awesome, yes. But.... No forests, greenery, less towns and so on.

I just wanted to show you how a map as small as SA's (compared to V's, which is obvious if you compare those videos of SA to V screenshots) felt so big. Now, if SA map managed to feel so big, why would you even start to worry a map as big as V's won't. When you're on the ground, driving or walking, only then will you truly understand how big this map is. And if they managed to put in so much variety in SA, what makes you thing there's not any of that in V. You have forests, lake, mountains, deserts, trailer park, small towns, farms.. just like SA, and all in a much bigger scale. And then there's all the parts of map we didn't exactly see yet.

Quote train hehe wink.gif

One of those Mountains around Alamo Sea fills tons of space on the map of GTA SA. So it will be easy for GTA V to be way bigger than SA. But I'm talking about diversity... SA looks ugly and small nowadays, but it feels very diverse in my opinion.

GTA V has other terms of scale. And if I look at all those pretty accurate fan-maps.... Its all just Alamo Sea, desert and some big hills.. Where the hell should fit farmland, dense forests, lakes, greenery etc..... in? I am not pessimistic, but... Disappointed so far. Zancudo River, Alamo Sea, Los Santos. It just doesn't seem to be massive and diverse to me.

Dope_0110
  • Dope_0110

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#15905

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:40 AM

QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:34)
Quote train hehe wink.gif

One of those Mountains around Alamo Sea fills tons of space on the map of GTA SA. So it will be easy for GTA V to be way bigger than SA. But I'm talking about diversity... SA looks ugly and small nowadays, but it feels very diverse in my opinion.

GTA V has other terms of scale. And if I look at all those pretty accurate fan-maps.... Its all just Alamo Sea, desert and some big hills.. Where the hell should fit farmland, dense forests, lakes, greenery etc..... in? I am not pessimistic, but... Disappointed so far.

I just told you, there is all of that. We can see all of those in the screenshots/trailers. SA was great in it's time, but in reality, it will feel very small once we get into V. And I repeat again, we haven't even seen some parts of it, and SA had all those things very close to each other, now with a bigger scale, there will be even more of those things, and probably properly spaced out.

Choco Taco
  • Choco Taco

    .

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011

#15906

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:45 AM

For comparison purposes:

http://i.imgur.com/0LLP0vK.jpg


un94
  • un94

    Snitch

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2012

#15907

Posted 20 July 2013 - 12:48 AM

I hope you're right. But since I have seen all the fanmade maps, I just can't imagine where there should me much more farmland, towns, the huge mountain from trailer#1 or forests... Some trees on a hill is not a forest to me. Places like Tall Trees in RDR or Back o Beyond in SA should be in V. I want to get lost.

SimMaster
  • SimMaster

    San Andreas Explorer

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2005

#15908

Posted 20 July 2013 - 02:25 AM

QUOTE (Choco Taco @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 19:45)
For comparison purposes:

http://i.imgur.com/0LLP0vK.jpg

The GTA:SA screenshot is wide angle and the GTAV one is zoomed in. I don't think you can compare them perfectly.

Nem Wan
  • Nem Wan

    The Artist Formerly Known As Magic_Al

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Aug 2006
  • United-States

#15909

Posted 20 July 2013 - 02:40 AM

QUOTE (un94 @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 18:01)
QUOTE (jfavignano @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:37)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

No

Sorry, but I'm with him. The fanmade maps seem to be pretty accurate. And they indeed look pretty small. We already know the northern end of the map. I am not bitching or trolling, but I'm really disappointed about the map so far. I just can not imagine how the landmass can be as big as R* told us. I think they overestimated the mapsize themselves. They always show us the Alamo Sea or hills around Alamo Sea from different angles. And I am really afraid that the map will not be bigger than that. LS, Alamo Sea and some big Mountains around it which will fill most of map-space. I hope I'm wrong but.... since we know the map ends just north of Alamo Sea... well... I just expected more for the biggest and most ambitious game R* ever created. They just promised sooooo much...!

SA had tons of farms ... forests, vegetation, desert, rivers, diversity, tons of small towns and settlements... not as beautiful as current gen but awesome for 2005... GTA V has shown us desert, a huge sea, 3 towns, a vineyard and some very huge mountains,... no forests, no other towns, no greenery, no vegetation, no places faaaar away from Alamo Sea or LS, no other lakes or rivers confused.gif ... yes it will have more features than all other GTA-games, but I am very disappointed with the map so far. Don't need other cities! But it seems to be just... small and not diverse. Everything seems to happen around LS, Zancudo River and Alamo Sea. I just hope R* is hiding tons of the map.

Yes. Customization, Gameplay, Activities, Story, Weapons... R* puts tons of energy in this game, but... Well... I personally just don't like the map so far. confused.gif

There's two factors in potential disappointment with size: thinking the maps of San Andreas, IV, and Red Dead Redemption are bigger than they are, and thinking GTAV is smaller than it is. A map that is something around 20 square miles of land in a 30 square mile area would fulfill being bigger than those three games in terms of playable area, or the land area could even be a little less depending how developed the underwater stuff is and what might be interior and underground.

ECDT1089
  • ECDT1089

    TheGamer

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011

#15910

Posted 20 July 2013 - 03:03 AM Edited by ECDT1089, 20 July 2013 - 04:13 AM.

QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

How can you even say that when the FULL map of the game hasn't even been released yet? dozingoff.gif

Jordando
  • Jordando

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2005

#15911

Posted 20 July 2013 - 03:36 AM

QUOTE (ECDT1089 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 03:03)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

How can you even say that when the FULL map of the game hasn't even been release yet? dozingoff.gif

Seriously though, these morons act as if they've already seen the entirety of the official map. So what if a bunch of fans came up with some calculations and theorized how big the map is? That doesn't mean sh*t when the official map hasn't been revealed.

Stop forming opinions and already feeling cheated by R* when we still have 58 some odd days to go, people.

Jordando
  • Jordando

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2005

#15912

Posted 20 July 2013 - 03:48 AM

QUOTE (ill-thoughts @ Thursday, Jul 18 2013, 02:01)
if thats the map, im not getting the game.

...You suck so much ass...

Screewdriver
  • Screewdriver

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2011

#15913

Posted 20 July 2013 - 04:38 AM

QUOTE (ECDT1089 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 03:03)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

How can you even say that when the FULL map of the game hasn't even been released yet? dozingoff.gif

Because they think R* have showed us the whole map tounge.gif

MrMusAddict
  • MrMusAddict

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2013

#15914

Posted 20 July 2013 - 04:52 AM

QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:21)
QUOTE (Dope_0110 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:15)
QUOTE (un94 @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 00:01)
QUOTE (jfavignano @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:37)
QUOTE (galatasaray @ Friday, Jul 19 2013, 22:28)
I don't believe that the map is bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined..
I think rockstar fooled us.. The maps here are so small .. Smaller than SA
There is only one major city 3-4 big mountains and a big sea wow.. So theres no way that this map is big.. I think it will be a little bit smaller than SA.. But with the underwater world it will be bigger.. I also think that rockstar added too many enormous mountains..
But yeah I'm really disappointed with the size and the shape of the map..

No

Sorry, but I'm with him. The fanmade maps seem to be pretty accurate. And they indeed look pretty small. We already know the northern end of the map. I am not bitching or trolling, but I'm really disappointed about the map so far. I just can not imagine how the landmass can be as big as R* told us. I think they overestimated the mapsize themselves. They always show us the Alamo Sea or hills around Alamo Sea from different angles. And I am really afraid that the map will not be bigger than that. LS, Alamo Sea and some big Mountains around it which will fill most of map-space. I hope I'm wrong but.... since we know the map ends just north of Alamo Sea... well... I just expected more for the biggest and most ambitious game R* ever created. They just promised sooooo much...!

SA had tons of farms ... forests, vegetation, desert, rivers, diversity, tons of small towns and settlements... not as beautiful as current gen but awesome for 2005... GTA V has shown us desert, a huge sea, 3 towns, a vineyard and some very huge mountains,... no forests, no other towns, no greenery, no vegetation, no places faaaar away from Alamo Sea or LS, no other lakes or rivers confused.gif ... yes it will have more features than all other GTA-games, but I am very disappointed with the map so far. Don't need other cities! But it seems to be just... small and not diverse. Everything seems to happen around LS, Zancudo River and Alamo Sea. I just hope R* is hiding tons of the map.

Yes. Customization, Gameplay, Activities, Story, Weapons... R* puts tons of energy in this game, but... Well... I personally just don't like the map so far. confused.gif

Please go to youtube, type ''San Andreas Draw Distance mod'' in the search box and watch some of the videos that you get. Then you will see what would SA really look like it if had the same drawing distance as V, and you'd also see how small it seems because of that.

You are right, it's technically VERY small. But it just FELT big and diverse. And I am afraid GTA V won't feel big. It's countryside seems to be a big lake, some big hills and three or four towns and a vineyard. It looks awesome, yes. But.... No forests, greenery, less towns and so on.

One of those Mountains around Alamo Sea fills tons of space on the map of GTA SA. So it will be easy for GTA V to be way bigger than SA. But I'm talking about diversity... SA looks ugly nowadays, but it feels very diverse in my opinion.

Just so you know, here's one of the most accurate comparisons of GTA4 to just Los Santos:

user posted image

Mind you, the rest of the map is mountain, plains, desert, lakes, rivers, redwood forest, beaches and coral reefs. The suburbs are filled with trailer parks, rural towns, an army base, a federal prison, winding mountain roads, and hiking paths. Also mind you, all of THIS area outside of Los Santos is about the same size as RDR and GTA:SA combined. Yes, that includes some underwater stuff, but 1 map worth of city, 1.5 maps of wilderness, and 0.5 maps of water is still better than just another GTA.

How is this less diverse than any previous games, let alone all previous open world Rockstar games? (ergo, GTA, RDR, Midnight Club)

Sockpuppet
  • Sockpuppet

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Apr 2013

#15915

Posted 20 July 2013 - 05:15 AM

The map seems small because we're not getting the detail we need to give us a proper sense of scale.

I mean, look at the screenshots we've seen. Most of the ones that show us a lot of the landscape are aerial shots. The draw distance is great, but it's deceiving because in any other GTA game, being able to see a landmark in the distance means it's pretty close. Here, when you see a mountain or a building or something in the distance, it's miles away. And at the same time, because you're looking at something so far away, the LOD is knocking out all the fine details and the trees and telephone wires and things, so you can't tell how small they are in comparison and it just looks like an empty space.

It's the same with the fan maps. Other than LS, Sandy Shores, and Paleto, there's hardly any detail, just big blobs where we think mountains or deserts are. You remember that shot from the Trevor's trailer, flying over vineyards and the airstrip? That's not even on the fan maps. Even in the blueprint map of LS, whole city blocks full of houses or other buildings have been replaced with featureless white blobs.

Those of you complaining that SA "felt bigger" and "had more variety" should remember that there's enough room in V's map to fit all those little bits of terrain in twice over. They could easily have a forest the size of Tall Trees or the area around Angel Pine tucked away somewhere between two of the mountains where none of the trailers or screenshots would show it and we wouldn't have a clue.

I'm not saying all that stuff WILL be there; I have no proof of that. What I'm saying is that it could be there... and I think when you're playing the game, driving around on ground level and seeing things up close, it's going to feel a lot bigger than these fan maps and screenshots look.

Screewdriver
  • Screewdriver

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2011

#15916

Posted 20 July 2013 - 06:53 AM

QUOTE (Sockpuppet @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 05:15)
The map seems small because we're not getting the detail we need to give us a proper sense of scale.

I mean, look at the screenshots we've seen. Most of the ones that show us a lot of the landscape are aerial shots. The draw distance is great, but it's deceiving because in any other GTA game, being able to see a landmark in the distance means it's pretty close. Here, when you see a mountain or a building or something in the distance, it's miles away. And at the same time, because you're looking at something so far away, the LOD is knocking out all the fine details and the trees and telephone wires and things, so you can't tell how small they are in comparison and it just looks like an empty space.

It's the same with the fan maps. Other than LS, Sandy Shores, and Paleto, there's hardly any detail, just big blobs where we think mountains or deserts are. You remember that shot from the Trevor's trailer, flying over vineyards and the airstrip? That's not even on the fan maps. Even in the blueprint map of LS, whole city blocks full of houses or other buildings have been replaced with featureless white blobs.

Those of you complaining that SA "felt bigger" and "had more variety" should remember that there's enough room in V's map to fit all those little bits of terrain in twice over. They could easily have a forest the size of Tall Trees or the area around Angel Pine tucked away somewhere between two of the mountains where none of the trailers or screenshots would show it and we wouldn't have a clue.

I'm not saying all that stuff WILL be there; I have no proof of that. What I'm saying is that it could be there... and I think when you're playing the game, driving around on ground level and seeing things up close, it's going to feel a lot bigger than these fan maps and screenshots look.

In the vineyard sceene, there is a mountain far away in the distant. I first thought it was clouds, but it is in the gameplay video. When you see the deers by the water, and the lady is saying "and untouched wilderness". That should mean the map is pretty big...since no one knows where the "vineyard-valley" is?

VincentPericant
  • VincentPericant

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2010

#15917

Posted 20 July 2013 - 07:36 AM

The people that complain about the map size need to turn their computers off and go outside. The map of the real world is literally f*cking massive! Go explore that.

jameznash
  • jameznash

    Mack Pimp

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#15918

Posted 20 July 2013 - 08:21 AM

the best way to get a sense of scale to this map is play GTA IV and bring up the map.

When you do this the map is tiny to 'fit the screen' - then you can zoom in and out to see more detail.

Just think of GTA V map as the same. R* have to fit the map onto a poster or TV screen - So its zoomed out to fit.

You can fit a map of the UK on A4 paper and do the same for USA. but the size is 40x different.
Just look at GTA V screen shots - you can see how big everything is, how far you can see. this map is huge.

In SA the countryside was basic (great but basic) just there to split up the cities. In GTA V the countryside has a purpose and lots of things to do. The detail will make each small area interesting so you will want to explore and find every detail. That's what will make this game and map feel so huge.

Its also huge on a 3D scale as well which everyone complaining forgets. The mountains are huge and the see deep. This all adds to more overall surface area to explore.

I play these games for the scale and detail - I am not worried a tiny bit. Bring it on. rampage_ani.gif

Insincere
  • Insincere

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2013
  • Unknown

#15919

Posted 20 July 2013 - 08:59 AM Edited by TheTruthOnly, 20 July 2013 - 09:26 AM.

Why x3.5 RDR map count only with the "playable area"? That's stupid as f**k. It still counts, without it map wouldn't look properly, so it must count as a whole map.
Anyway you still making SA enormously big which is wrong. GTA V has different scale, everything has proper size. In SA whole map is highly compressed, 3 cities with different specific surroundings and couple of towns, but now Los Santos and Liberty City from IV alone are almost the size of that. What makes that map so big was small Draw Distance, specific weather conditions for each area ( now it can't be done with soo big Draw Distance ), !differential terrain but on really small scale!, story making you feel that you really away (that time when Tenpenny get you out of LS). I don't know why I posting this, it doesn't really matter now. GTA V is bigger than SA, IV and RDR combined cool.gif

GourangaMaster
  • GourangaMaster

    ▲▲▼▼◄►◄►BA

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2011

#15920

Posted 20 July 2013 - 09:27 AM

user posted image

FreshPots
  • FreshPots

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2013
  • New-Zealand

#15921

Posted 20 July 2013 - 09:45 AM

awesome, looks like that river and valley goes on for quite a while then

and if thats where the 'army base' is to the right of the first screen then maybe in the maps it needs to be further back toward the alamo sea and have the river stretch further? thoughts?

SergioBel
  • SergioBel

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2011
  • Russia

#15922

Posted 20 July 2013 - 09:46 AM

Nice! cookie.gif

Tankshell
  • Tankshell

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 May 2013

#15923

Posted 20 July 2013 - 09:59 AM

QUOTE (Tankshell @ Sunday, Jul 14 2013, 14:07)
Clutching at straws a bit but was going over the trailers and photos again in an attempt to locate the hiker mountain range from Trailer 1 and this is the only remotely close match I can make... assuming that mountain even still exists in the game world.

There are a few reasons I am thinking it is possible:
  • Those trees look really tall considering how far away they are in the recent gameplay trailer, and we haven't really seen any of these really tall redwood style trees in any other screenshots or trailers since Trailer 1, and the mountain almost fits the profile
  • It would also put it over on the East side of the map, somewhere we haven't seen any screenshots or videos of yet I believe, as no mappers are able to accurately map that region yet.... which would make sense as to why we haven't seen this mountain since Trailer 1.
  • Also, one other key thing, if you watch trailer 1 again, keep a close eye on the top left corner, you will see the sun flicking through the trees very briefly. As we know, the sun rises in the East and sets in the West. It is likely these people are starting their hike in the morning, rather than the late evening (colour of the sky, lack of any haze/pink and also the shadows being cast on the mountains would suggest this is 10am ish), which puts the sun in the east, which also supports the theory that this scene is over on the east side of the map, or at the very least, they are pointing East.
It IS a longshot however biggrin.gif

user posted image

Anyone have any more thoughts on my post here, I think it got lost in the deluge of posts back when I originally made it?

FreshPots
  • FreshPots

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2013
  • New-Zealand

#15924

Posted 20 July 2013 - 10:28 AM

i think its definitely plausible. its gotten me excited because i've been waiting to figure out where that is since the first trailer came out. Its the first place i wanna go for some reason

mawerick_mc
  • mawerick_mc

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2008

#15925

Posted 20 July 2013 - 10:32 AM

@Tankshell

sorry if i'm rude, but you need some glasses wink.gif where in the hell you see similarities? mountain crest is completely different.
+both screens where already pointed on the map if i'm not mistaken (at least approximately) and they are not near each other

once more, i don't want to be rude, you just asked for opinion tounge.gif

Tankshell
  • Tankshell

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 May 2013

#15926

Posted 20 July 2013 - 11:31 AM Edited by Tankshell, 20 July 2013 - 11:34 AM.

QUOTE (mawerick_mc @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 10:32)
@Tankshell

sorry if i'm rude, but you need some glasses wink.gif where in the hell you see similarities? mountain crest is completely different.
+both screens where already pointed on the map if i'm not mistaken (at least approximately) and they are not near each other

once more, i don't want to be rude, you just asked for opinion tounge.gif

Of course like I said, I could be waaay off (probably am). But obviously the two screenshots are from completely different perspectives, which if I am imagining it correctly in my head, would correlate quite well in game. Not to mention the geometry could well have changed significantly by now, as it has been almost 2 years since that original trailer. I am normally pretty good at this kind of stuff, at least I made a good job of mapping the inside of Michael's house last week: http://www.gtaforums...opic=565666&hl=

I will be heading to this area 1st thing when the game is released to see if I was right!

biggrin.gif

ivarblaauw
  • ivarblaauw

    Night Light OutlawS MC President

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2012
  • Netherlands

#15927

Posted 20 July 2013 - 01:41 PM

Just a small question, but isn't it plausible, that the map is more then twice as big as we previously thought? I have seen the pictures of the country side, and it looks like the map is gigantic, biggest map in a game in 4 years I think? Which makes the possibility of multiple cities more plausible (NO I WON"T START A DISCUSSION!!!)

Because it is so fast and big, I think the map is at least twice the size we think it is right now. wink.gif but that's just me tounge.gif

gwaha
  • gwaha

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2013

#15928

Posted 20 July 2013 - 02:15 PM Edited by gwaha, 20 July 2013 - 02:21 PM.

@Tankshell

I think you are right. I do believe you have found Mt Chilliad. The contours are extremely similar, eerily so. Earlier in the thread someone who was working on a 3D representation of the map, is he still doing that? With 3D representation we should be able to determine if it is truly Mt Chilliad from the perspective of the hikers. It is just not the right side that lines up it is the rest as well.

@ivarblaauw

I don't think it is likely that map is twice as big as previously thought in this thread. The map is actually getting "smaller" the more we see of the game. We have a pretty good understanding of how everything lines up towards the north of Los Santos. Only the west and east (still north of Los Santos) needs to be filled in better but I can't see it being wider than the current maps. I think the width of the map made by USAPatriot is spot on.

I do think the map is big enough. It is not as small as some people think either. Mountains tend to dominate the horizon and seem to be big even from far away.

zombie elvis
  • zombie elvis

    Mack Pimp

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2012

#15929

Posted 20 July 2013 - 02:18 PM

QUOTE (Tankshell @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 09:59)
Anyone have any more thoughts on my post here, I think it got lost in the deluge of posts back when I originally made it?

Here's a better look at some of those trees:

http://www.rockstarg...ot/743/1280.jpg

Personally I think the hikers are on the NE of the Alamo mountain looking up at the peak, I can't really see anything else working.

jfavignano
  • jfavignano

    Aviation/Weather Nerd

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jun 2012

#15930

Posted 20 July 2013 - 02:29 PM

QUOTE (zombie elvis @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 14:18)
QUOTE (Tankshell @ Saturday, Jul 20 2013, 09:59)
Anyone have any more thoughts on my post here, I think it got lost in the deluge of posts back when I originally made it?

Here's a better look at some of those trees:

http://www.rockstarg...ot/743/1280.jpg

Personally I think the hikers are on the NE of the Alamo mountain looking up at the peak, I can't really see anything else working.

I have to agree Elvis, that is Chiliad (Alamo) looking up towards the peak. My guess would be the west side looking east.

Also to all the naysayers "This map is smaller than SA, blah blah balh" I will no longer respond to you, retardation runs thick on this forum as it is and this is a mapping thread not a bitch about the map size. This map is going to be huge Rockstar has said it themselves, I see it myself, people with brains understand just how big it will be. Get over it.




6 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users