Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Map Size Thread

8,295 replies to this topic
ALeSsAnDrO
  • ALeSsAnDrO

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2002

#61

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:35 PM

QUOTE (GKP @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 21:18)
Kifflom, thats just it...ironically I know the rest of the game will be excellent ..its the size that for me, affects the believability of being in a big city.

A 45 second drive from mission briefing to bank robbery or assassination mission (in the city missions) is just a bit of a copout and something the series has suffered from for 15 years.

Red - actually I am of the opinion that V will be smoother and have less microstuttering than IV. The 2nd trailer looks good.

You know one day a company will have the balls to produce a real life LA in a game. The tech from Luxoflux ( now defunct) mapped real life sat data and created an enormous metropolis (True Crime) . No the dynamics of the game weren't that good (animations etc) but the scale !...your bored !you say your supposed to be playing a gangster with patience, guile, character and maturity and you cant drive for 15 minutes to a mission !

A corporate goliath with shareholders and an impatient prepubescent fan base will always cater for the majority, the ignorant ie COD playing 'average' gamers. People who play sim type games or who are older WOULD love a giant , true scale city to explore. I want to get lost and I do not want novelty or excitement around every corner. Repetitive , anonymous streets are the heart of US cities and 'skipping' that content is a shame as its the SCALE of US cities that give them their soul.

Real life city sizes WILL be the future.

I guarantee you that if someday someone makes a game with a real size city and real life gameplay (15 or more min from point A to point B) that game is going to tank hard.
I'm all for a realistic sized metropolis but not without the usual commodities in gaming (fast travel/fast cars/arcadey gameplay).
If I wanna get bored and punish myself with poor game mechanics I'll go play some Skyrim or Fallout.

GKP
  • GKP

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2011

#62

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:37 PM

True crime didnt 'tank' it was somewhat successful.

The thing is you could have both. True scaled cities AND fast travel options. Wheres the harm ?

GTAfan786
  • GTAfan786

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

#63

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:49 PM

People are underestimating the size. Look how much detail is in one part of LS, imagine how big the full city is. Sure in comparable size it might not be bigger than LC, but it will feel much bigger due to the vast detail and active environment.

Official General
  • Official General

    You gotta always carry heat in these Vice City streets

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010

#64

Posted 09 April 2013 - 09:55 PM

QUOTE (GTAfan786 @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 21:49)
People are underestimating the size. Look how much detail is in one part of LS, imagine how big the full city is. Sure in comparable size it might not be bigger than LC, but it will feel much bigger due to the vast detail and active environment.

Sorry mate, but I just cannot see Los Santos in GTA V still feeling like a very big place if it's not even bigger than Liberty City in GTA IV. That would be very disappointing, if LS was a bit smaller than LC. I'm pretty sure Los Angeles is bigger than New York City according to landmass in real life too, so that would make it an even bigger fail.

I'm only underestimating the size of LC due to what I can see from the images. I hope LS is very big the end for sure, but I'll just have to wait and see.

GTAfan786
  • GTAfan786

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

#65

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:00 PM

QUOTE (Official General @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 21:55)
QUOTE (GTAfan786 @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 21:49)
People are underestimating the size. Look how much detail is in one part of LS, imagine how big the full city is. Sure in comparable size it might not be bigger than LC, but it will feel much bigger due to the vast detail and active environment.

Sorry mate, but I just cannot see Los Santos in GTA V still feeling like a very big place if it's not even bigger than Liberty City in GTA IV. That would be very disappointing, if LS was a bit smaller than LC. I'm pretty sure Los Angeles is bigger than New York City according to landmass in real life too, so that would make it an even bigger fail.

I'm only underestimating the size of LC due to what I can see from the images. I hope LS is very big the end for sure, but I'll just have to wait and see.

LA is not that bigger than NYC. NYC is just about bigger with over 8 million people living there even though its crammed up really, while LA has just about 5 million people living there. Land Mass wise, they are almost equal. Don't expect LS to be so big that there won't be space for countryside, deserts and so on.

iNero
  • iNero

    Black Tiger Sex Machine

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • Germany

#66

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:05 PM

I watched this one. It looks pretty big on the first view. But if u watch closely its a bit weird.
Looks like there are way less buildings and pretty bug lanes. Idk why but somehow it looks like its not much bigger than original los santos.


http://img11.hosting...46498128037.jpg

GTAfan786
  • GTAfan786

    Gangsta

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2013

#67

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:07 PM

QUOTE (iNero @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 22:05)
I watched this one. It looks pretty big on the first view. But if u watch closely its a bit weird.
Looks like there are way less buildings and pretty bug lanes. Idk why but somehow it looks like its not much bigger than original los santos.


http://img11.hosting...46498128037.jpg

The game is still not finished you know, since there is 5 more months, they will surely improve something. Besides the way they've taken the pics suggest that there is more than meets the eye. Basically, i doubt they've even showed us the other part.

Official General
  • Official General

    You gotta always carry heat in these Vice City streets

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010

#68

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:10 PM Edited by Official General, 09 April 2013 - 10:15 PM.

QUOTE (GTAfan786 @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 22:00)
QUOTE (Official General @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 21:55)
QUOTE (GTAfan786 @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 21:49)
People are underestimating the size. Look how much detail is in one part of LS, imagine how big the full city is. Sure in comparable size it might not be bigger than LC, but it will feel much bigger due to the vast detail and active environment.

Sorry mate, but I just cannot see Los Santos in GTA V still feeling like a very big place if it's not even bigger than Liberty City in GTA IV. That would be very disappointing, if LS was a bit smaller than LC. I'm pretty sure Los Angeles is bigger than New York City according to landmass in real life too, so that would make it an even bigger fail.

I'm only underestimating the size of LC due to what I can see from the images. I hope LS is very big the end for sure, but I'll just have to wait and see.

LA is not that bigger than NYC. NYC is just about bigger with over 8 million people living there even though its crammed up really, while LA has just about 5 million people living there. Land Mass wise, they are almost equal. Don't expect LS to be so big that there won't be space for countryside, deserts and so on.

My, oh my facedesk.gif

Do you know the difference between city size in population and city size in landmass ? I'm sure you do, so please don't act stupid. And I did stress landmass, what is wrong with people on this site, either they can't read or they chose not to read properly. I did not mention the population.

LA is considerably bigger than NYC in terms of landmass, in a significant way. Check the facts yourself and see.

ALeSsAnDrO
  • ALeSsAnDrO

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2002

#69

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:12 PM

QUOTE (GKP @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 21:37)
True crime didnt 'tank' it was somewhat successful.

The thing is you could have both. True scaled cities AND fast travel options. Wheres the harm ?

I remember that the True Crime character models and motion captured movement were quite good for that time. It was an ambitious project. The city was huge, too bad it looked so bad and played worse.
If someone makes a real size city with all the great details, that feels alive, with time cycle, weather changes and so on, without sacrificing what we have for granted as good gameplay, i'm really all for it.

iNero
  • iNero

    Black Tiger Sex Machine

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • Germany

#70

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:18 PM

For comparison:
Original Los Santos ( on rage engine so you see the distance)
http://www.gtaivsa.c...sarage(161).jpg

http://www.king3.de/...Santos-gta-.jpg

On the first pic u see it really not much bigger. Probably same size as San Andreas Los Santos

GKP
  • GKP

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2011

#71

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:19 PM

Looks like its just the 3 of us who would buy it !

Original LS is only bit smaller than LS in V. That should not be the case.

73duster
  • 73duster

    Ghetto Star

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2011

#72

Posted 09 April 2013 - 10:58 PM

1- The city is pretty F'ING big.
2- Everyone is judging the map size by the limited amount of screenshots we've received.
The bottom line is, Rockstar has repeatedly stated that they don't want to reveal everything because they don't want to spoil the game. It doesn't make sense to me that we have seen everything, because the environment is quite possibly the single most important aspect of this game. I'm excited because we HAVE been shown a huge amount of screenshots that cover a vast landscape. So just imagine what we HAVEN'T seen.................

Kifflom112
  • Kifflom112

    I like to spam

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2012

#73

Posted 09 April 2013 - 11:03 PM

QUOTE (GKP @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 17:19)
Original LS is only bit smaller than LS in V.

Well'p, I'm done. rolleyes.gif It seems some of you are just frikkin' loopy and thus it's not worth arguing with you all. Not after this...

kesta195
  • kesta195

    L.S.P.D.

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2011

#74

Posted 09 April 2013 - 11:45 PM

Consider the fact that the SF valley may still be in the game, as we have not seen the area directly behind the observatory yet. If this is the case you can add AT LEAST 30% to the size so far.

JonRenemy
  • JonRenemy

    Greater Than Great

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2008

#75

Posted 10 April 2013 - 12:18 AM

http://s7.postimg.or...tav_LS_wide.jpg

I removed the barrel distortion which gives us a much clearer view overall of just how FAR away this photo is being taken from, and just how MASSIVE the city still feels even after you take that into consideration.

Darrel
  • Darrel

    Reported!

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2007

#76

Posted 10 April 2013 - 12:35 AM Edited by Darrel, 10 April 2013 - 12:46 AM.

The city is not small, at all. Look at this.

This image right here. You see the observatory to the right. but you cannot even see the vinewood hill. And to the left you cannot see all of the hills which end at the beach.

user posted image


Now this screen i captured showes that you can now see where the hills end to the left at the beach but the observatory is out of the frame.

user posted image


To me this shows a view close to street level gives us a better feel of how big the map is. You cannot even see the vinewood sign here or let alone all that
space to the left of the sign which you can see at the end of trailer 2 where the jet is attacking the choppers.

FJT2123
  • FJT2123

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2008

#77

Posted 10 April 2013 - 01:02 AM

We still have barely seen any of East LS. The city is going to be huge so shaddup

Nobaca
  • Nobaca

    Get my boy sucked toothless from his gums

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2011

#78

Posted 10 April 2013 - 01:49 AM

Looking at Los santos from here
http://assets1.ignim...kjpg-19d2fa.jpg
Is not like looking at Los santos from here
user posted image
That is a huge highway like 8 lanes for the highway! GTA IV nor gta sa had that!

The street view of Los santos is bigger than a high point of view of los santos.
Itsl like looking at gta sa from the top, and then actually driving it from Los santos docks to bayside took a good few minutes even in a hot ring racer/ or nrg-500!

Deffpony
  • Deffpony

    Stay Golden Ponyboy

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2007
  • None

#79

Posted 10 April 2013 - 01:58 AM

I hate to be that negative guy, but I just dont see LS being too big, which is a shame. What seems odd to me is that Downtown LS is MAYBE roughly the size of LC, and the whole map is IV+RDR+SA. That means that the countryside is RDR+SA. That just seems like too much country side. Sure there will be small towns, but hopefully they arent like the baron wasteland towns of SA where there was absolutely nothing in these towns

ChillyPhilly
  • ChillyPhilly

    Rock 'n' roll stops the traffic.

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2007

#80

Posted 10 April 2013 - 02:29 AM

Can anyone work out the height of V's version of the US Bank Tower?

Official General
  • Official General

    You gotta always carry heat in these Vice City streets

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010

#81

Posted 10 April 2013 - 04:29 AM Edited by Official General, 10 April 2013 - 11:16 AM.

QUOTE (deffpony @ Wednesday, Apr 10 2013, 01:58)
I hate to be that negative guy, but I just dont see LS being too big, which is a shame. What seems odd to me is that Downtown LS is MAYBE roughly the size of LC, and the whole map is IV+RDR+SA. That means that the countryside is RDR+SA. That just seems like too much country side. Sure there will be small towns, but hopefully they arent like the baron wasteland towns of SA where there was absolutely nothing in these towns

This is the same point I have made a good number of times on here. The screenshots of GTA V so far show how nicely detailed the city of Los Santos looks, and that is great. But at the same time, the images do not show me that LS looks very big and that is my honest view right now. I can only go by what my eyes can see, and the fact many people agree and have discussed this many times shows there is a good reason why I hold this view. When I first saw Liberty City in GTA IV, the place looked huge from the outset, and I just don't get that feeling this time around for V.

Then we've got others on here who stupidly keep on yelling to us how that whole map in V will be huge and we have not seen it all yet - IT IS THE CITY that we are saying looks small, not the whole f*cking map, please get that into your titanium thick skulls.

Agni
  • Agni

    Rex Ignaviae

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2012

#82

Posted 10 April 2013 - 04:32 AM

Have you been to LA before? The actual city, as in the downtown area, is tiny as hell compared to the sprawl around it. I'm not surprised Los Santos is pretty small as well.

Deffpony
  • Deffpony

    Stay Golden Ponyboy

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2007
  • None

#83

Posted 10 April 2013 - 04:40 AM

QUOTE (Agni @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 23:32)
Have you been to LA before? The actual city, as in the downtown area, is tiny as hell compared to the sprawl around it. I'm not surprised Los Santos is pretty small as well.

All I am saying is that if they are going to do one city rather than 2 or three, the one downtown portion of the game should be big, so that it feels like a city.

Im still hoping that there is alot to dowtown that we havent seen, but from what we have seen, it looks kind of small. Dan Houser talked about wanting to do a "sprawling" city, and this just doesnt give that vibe.

iNero
  • iNero

    Black Tiger Sex Machine

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2012
  • Germany

#84

Posted 10 April 2013 - 04:57 AM

QUOTE (deffpony @ Wednesday, Apr 10 2013, 01:58)
I hate to be that negative guy, but I just dont see LS being too big, which is a shame. What seems odd to me is that Downtown LS is MAYBE roughly the size of LC, and the whole map is IV+RDR+SA. That means that the countryside is RDR+SA. That just seems like too much country side. Sure there will be small towns, but hopefully they arent like the baron wasteland towns of SA where there was absolutely nothing in these towns

Thats what I said. Even when los santos in V is bigger than in Sam Andreas, the countryside and desert part would be just wayyyy too huge. They would have to fill it with alot of stuff. But when watching screens from above like trevor jumping out of the car or the photo viewer pic, it seems like the countryside isnt that populated or filled.

Predictiins are that there are a few little cities in the desert but ti get to them u have to drive a while through empty desert. Like from san fierro to las venturas. Only special thing between was the little airport. At least i cant remember much more. Some oil stuff maybe.


Well, maybe there is some more behind the mountain row where the train drives through. I hope there is. Otherwise the mountains would be the map limit and u cant fly over them. Which also means u cant fly around them which is also pretty weird. But considering that its oritented on los angeles, i doubt that its an island and we cant fly over

Agni
  • Agni

    Rex Ignaviae

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2012

#85

Posted 10 April 2013 - 05:00 AM

By "sprawling city", I am almost certain he's referring to the huge amount of suburban sprawl in LA. Real life LA's downtown is simply not that big, but there's a town of stuff OUTSIDE of it. I'm not worried about the size at all.

Deffpony
  • Deffpony

    Stay Golden Ponyboy

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2007
  • None

#86

Posted 10 April 2013 - 05:16 AM

QUOTE (Agni @ Wednesday, Apr 10 2013, 00:00)
By "sprawling city", I am almost certain he's referring to the huge amount of suburban sprawl in LA. Real life LA's downtown is simply not that big, but there's a town of stuff OUTSIDE of it. I'm not worried about the size at all.

But where is the sprawling suburb. As far as I can tell, once the city surrounding hit the hillsides, there not much suburbs

Choco Taco
  • Choco Taco

    .

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011

#87

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:13 AM

QUOTE (JonRenemy @ Tuesday, Apr 9 2013, 18:18)
user posted image

I removed the barrel distortion which gives us a much clearer view overall of just how FAR away this photo is being taken from, and just how MASSIVE the city still feels even after you take that into consideration.

Why did you stretch the bottom ends out instead of pushing the top ends in?

wallis
  • wallis

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2011

#88

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:27 AM

QUOTE (deffpony @ Wednesday, Apr 10 2013, 05:16)
QUOTE (Agni @ Wednesday, Apr 10 2013, 00:00)
By "sprawling city", I am almost certain he's referring to the huge amount of suburban sprawl in LA. Real life LA's downtown is simply not that big, but there's a town of stuff OUTSIDE of it. I'm not worried about the size at all.

But where is the sprawling suburb. As far as I can tell, once the city surrounding hit the hillsides, there not much suburbs

Exactly. I'm sorry I don't know how to post a picture. There's a screenshot showing Trevor climbing the Vinewood sign. In the background you can see the river and bridges next to downtown and the suburbs to the east. They don't look real big. They look sort of rural and the hills behind that are bare. This area looks like the city limits to the east and represents the Riverside area. So once you drive from downtown over the bridge there only seems to be a small suburb with a few spaced out houses.
We can see how far the downtown area is from the ocean at Santa Monica Peir in several screenshots. It's not real big. Looks like a one minute drive on the freeway.
Then there's the Observatory view to the docks. This seems to be the one concerning most. The downtown skyline to the docks is what I'm most concerned about. There's nothing in between. Where's South Central? Watts, Compton, Longbeach? This area makes up 80% of the real LA basin area. Check it out on Google Maps. Downtown to the docks is vast, but non existant in R*'s version.
The only places that aren't visible so far is north, over the hills behind Beverly Hills and the northeast Pasadena area. But this area is only a quarter of the size of the main city basin area that we can see in the observatory screenshots, so I'm not expecting too much there.
When I first seen the observatory screenshots I was a little excited, thinking if it's this small there must be more cities, SF, LV. They've been ruled out, but the city still seems small.

GKP
  • GKP

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2011

#89

Posted 10 April 2013 - 06:45 AM Edited by GKP, 10 April 2013 - 07:10 AM.

Anyone notice how those who think the city is small give reasons and those who are happy just point to individual photos from ground level (which of course would make a 500 yard distance seem huge).

LS in V is smaller than the real life LAX (which is about 5 sq miles). That doesn't sit right with me.

The beach is half a mile away from downtown...

You wont be able to DO a great deal up mountains. The city was an essential part of the game and they gave us a small one. (Small) meaning you can cross its in a couple of minutes in a car .

We wont be able to go on those infamous LA car chases for more than 2 minutes (unless you go in circles)..is that your 'perfection' at play R* ?

This is Sprawl and WOULD of been possible if R* added in some suburbs allowing long city drives.

http://4.bp.blogspot...0/LA Sprawl.jpg

http://southseasmall...es_downtown.jpg

Real life LA downtown is huge and shows a 'forest' of skyscrapers.


Compare the above with R*'s pathetic representation and tell me your happy . Only those mature enough to give reasons reply.

GTAaLEX117
  • GTAaLEX117

    Cynical Optimist

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2013

#90

Posted 10 April 2013 - 07:58 AM

QUOTE (GKP @ Wednesday, Apr 10 2013, 06:45)
Anyone notice how those who think the city is small give reasons and those who are happy just point to individual photos from ground level (which of course would make a 500 yard distance seem huge).

LS in V is smaller than the real life LAX (which is about 5 sq miles). That doesn't sit right with me.

The beach is half a mile away from downtown...

You wont be able to DO a great deal up mountains. The city was an essential part of the game and they gave us a small one. (Small) meaning you can cross its in a couple of minutes in a car .

We wont be able to go on those infamous LA car chases for more than 2 minutes (unless you go in circles)..is that your 'perfection' at play R* ?

This is Sprawl and WOULD of been possible if R* added in some suburbs allowing long city drives.

http://4.bp.blogspot...0/LA Sprawl.jpg

http://southseasmall...es_downtown.jpg

Real life LA downtown is huge and shows a 'forest' of skyscrapers.


Compare the above with R*'s pathetic representation and tell me your happy . Only those mature enough to give reasons reply.

Here's the thing, LA is an incredibly big city, but something that big just just wouldn't work on this console generation. They don't have time, and they also do not want to. They want countryside, we, the large majority of the fanbase, also want countryside, we're tired of cities. Liberty City was big, but it was incredibly boring to travel across because most of the city just looked the same. This is the 10th time I told you this. Complaining won't get you anything, you automatically assume that you saw the whole city from these couple of screenshots, so it's not even valid criticism or complaining. You want a mature response? Stop complaining and wait until the game comes out! If not then just don't buy it. The community will be a lot better of without complainers.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users