|QUOTE (Ferocious Banger @ Friday, May 31 2013, 17:19)|
|QUOTE (whydoyouevenbother @ Friday, May 31 2013, 21:59)|
|QUOTE (Fatty Roman @ Friday, May 31 2013, 16:23)|
|QUOTE (whydoyouevenbother @ Friday, May 31 2013, 16:13)|
|QUOTE (Fatty Roman @ Friday, May 31 2013, 16:04)|
|QUOTE (whydoyouevenbother @ Friday, May 31 2013, 15:47)|
|QUOTE (Fatty Roman @ Friday, May 31 2013, 15:29)|
|QUOTE (whydoyouevenbother @ Friday, May 31 2013, 15:20)|
|QUOTE (Fatty Roman @ Friday, May 31 2013, 10:32)|
What you were arguing yesterday had nothing to do with what i was explaining.
I wasnt making a map size guess.
I simply stated that there are people on this forum that believe RDR is bigger than SA. At the same time they also believe that the map for V will be 3.5 tines RDR. Combine that with what we know - "V will be bigger than IV, RDR, and SA". Now I wasnt saying any of this is true because its not. These statements those people believe actually contradict eachother.
Again like i said if RDR is the biggest out of all, the sum of all of them can not be 3.5 times RDR. You cant add 2 small objects to the biggest and get a number that is 3.5 times the biggest. Its mathematically impossible.
ive seen you do this 100x now. you want to say that rockstar said "gta v is rdr, iv, and san andreas put together" when in actuality they said "gta v is BIGGER than san andreas, iv, and rdr combined WITH ROOM TO SPARE! that last part blow your reasoning all to hell. good try though. i still dont get how you cant understand this???
@dxbrandon... no... san andreas isnt bigger than rdr. its just the opposite, confirmed by dan houser himself.
I said that exact thing. Read what you quoted. You dont need to say 'bigger than' and 'room to spare' in the same sentence. They both mean the same thing. None of you "los santos size fanboys" ever read what youre quoting. You all quote somebody and say theyre wrong and then proceed to say the exact thing they just said. Thats why this thread is garbage.
so you realize your three squares math problem is complete bullsh*t because there is a fourth unknown variable? thats why i tried to explain it. it ibviously doesnt make any sense to you. oh well, i tried. like i said, prove me wrong... no one has.
@jo the ingame measurements prove nothing. somebody the other day say the protags run different speeds but that the measurements were the same. i asked why they thought the protags run different speeds and they said the games were a decade apart running on different engines on different generations of consoles which was exactly my point as to why the in game measurements are off. also, anyone that does in game measurements gets different results from the guy before them and the guy before that. unreliable to say the least. im still siding with the games creator. you do whatever your heart desires.
OT:yes the game looks massive. we have seen a lot of the city. i hope the next bit of info shows us what else the map has to offer
You are so thick headed. Let me space this out for you.
I never said SA was bigger or smaller.
I never tried to claim I knew the map size.
I never directly quoted Rockstar nor do I ever.
Again, you failed to read the very first thing i posted.
I was stating that THE OTHER PEOPLE that believe the statements "X,Y, and Z" are contradicting themselves because within those 3 statements lies a mathematical impossibility.
That was it.
I dont care which map is bigger.
I dont know which map is bigger.
it is not a mathematical impossibility for rdr to be the biggest... it cant be. if it had said gta v was exactly as big as sa,iv,and rdr and then said the game is 3.5x rdr then yes it would be impossible for rdr to be the biggest map. however, that wasnt the case. they said its bigger than those three maps with room to spare. therefore it is absolutely impossible to say which map is the biggest or smallest of those statements alone. im going off the two sources i posted of dan houser saying "rdr is twice as big as san andreas". also if you play the games its fairly obvious.
@ the hate... so i guess this confirm los santos is bigger than liberty city?
one more time and then im tapping out -
I NEVER CLAIMED TO KNOW WHICH MAP IS BIGGER NOR DO I CARE. I DONT CARE ABOUT WHAT QUOTES CAME FROM WHERE. I SAID THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE THOSE 3 STATEMENTS AND IF THOSE STATEMENTS WERE TRUE (which apperently theyre not) THEN THEY WOULD BE CONTRADICTING THEMSELVES AND THE MATH WOULDNT ADD UP.
Do you get it now? Is that clear enough?
And just for sh*ts and giggles you should post your source for where hauser was quoted saying rdr is twice as big as sa.
holy f*ck! the "3 statements" you speak of are false. the true statements were "gtav is bigger than gta iv, gta san andreas, and rdr with room to spare" and "gta v is 3.5xrdr, 5xrdr if you count the underwater explorable areas". therefore it isnt a mathematical impossibility that rdr could be the biggest. in fact it is highly plausible seeing as dan houser said "rdr is twice as big as sa"!!!
just for you fattyroman... chew on that for a minute
@acehigh... are you special or something? the map need only be roughly 3.35miles high by 3.35miles wide to come up with the square mileage he did...
Listen, Rockstar literally have confirmed the size of San Andreas to be 13.9 square miles.
They have also said that GTAIV is smaller than San Andreas.
Okay, let's say that RDR indeed is 28 square miles, just for your happiness.
28 plus 13.9 plus 6.25 (I'm including water areas too, for the sake of "room to spare ") equals 47.75 square miles.
BUT, GTAV is 3.5 times RDR, excluding the underwater. 3.5*28 equals 98 square miles.
Unless the land areas of GTA SA and GTAIV are doubled, you won't arrive anywhere close to 98 square miles.
hahahahahahaha! please, pretty please with a cherry on top provide the source where rockstar confirms that san andreas is 13.9 square miles...
also, ive provided two links that quote dan houser as saying rdr is roughly twice as big as san andreas...