Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Let's be realistic: GTA V is nowhere near the size or scope of San

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
559 replies to this topic
ezfaun
  • ezfaun

    Drive

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2009
  • None

#481

Posted 17 December 2013 - 06:21 PM Edited by ezfaun, 17 December 2013 - 06:21 PM.

 

Map size doesn't count as someone thinks
The idea behind san andreas (3 cities with countryside) would have been almost impossibile to achieve with V's detail on ps3 and xbox360

Probably choosing 1 big city and adding another one medium sized to the North with something unique to do ( and lock part of the map at the beginning ) would have given a better ''illusion'' of a huge and detailed map

 

just cause 2 had 400 sq. miles with hd graphics

 

400 sq. miles of generic goodness (:


user14
  • user14

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2013

#482

Posted 17 December 2013 - 06:24 PM

 

 

Map size doesn't count as someone thinks
The idea behind san andreas (3 cities with countryside) would have been almost impossibile to achieve with V's detail on ps3 and xbox360

Probably choosing 1 big city and adding another one medium sized to the North with something unique to do ( and lock part of the map at the beginning ) would have given a better ''illusion'' of a huge and detailed map

 

just cause 2 had 400 sq. miles with hd graphics

 

400 sq. miles of generic goodness (:

 

take that bitches :miranda:


ezfaun
  • ezfaun

    Drive

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2009
  • None

#483

Posted 17 December 2013 - 06:25 PM

 

 

 

Map size doesn't count as someone thinks
The idea behind san andreas (3 cities with countryside) would have been almost impossibile to achieve with V's detail on ps3 and xbox360

Probably choosing 1 big city and adding another one medium sized to the North with something unique to do ( and lock part of the map at the beginning ) would have given a better ''illusion'' of a huge and detailed map

 

just cause 2 had 400 sq. miles with hd graphics

 

400 sq. miles of generic goodness (:

 

take that bitches :miranda:

 

Generic = Copy and paste


user14
  • user14

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2013

#484

Posted 17 December 2013 - 06:31 PM

 

 

 

 

Map size doesn't count as someone thinks
The idea behind san andreas (3 cities with countryside) would have been almost impossibile to achieve with V's detail on ps3 and xbox360

Probably choosing 1 big city and adding another one medium sized to the North with something unique to do ( and lock part of the map at the beginning ) would have given a better ''illusion'' of a huge and detailed map

 

just cause 2 had 400 sq. miles with hd graphics

 

400 sq. miles of generic goodness (:

 

take that bitches :miranda:

 

Generic = Copy and paste

 

 

its an big island with mountains, not a city. what did you expect?


darkdayz
  • darkdayz

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Mar 2013

#485

Posted 17 December 2013 - 07:00 PM Edited by darkdayz, 17 December 2013 - 07:00 PM.

Let's be realistic: GTA V is nowhere near the size or scope of San

 

It's like the forum detected OP's bullsh*t and stopped his sentence for him.

  • Wolfhuman and Insincere like this

Cicero The Great
  • Cicero The Great

    Only We can use majestic plural, deal with it

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2013

#486

Posted 17 December 2013 - 07:13 PM Edited by Cicero The Great, 17 December 2013 - 07:19 PM.

Map size doesn't count as someone thinks
The idea behind san andreas (3 cities with countryside) would have been almost impossibile to achieve with V's detail on ps3 and xbox360
Probably choosing 1 big city and adding another one medium sized to the North with something unique to do ( and lock part of the map at the beginning ) would have given a better ''illusion'' of a huge and detailed map

 
just cause 2 had 400 sq. miles with hd graphics
With the amazing level of detail of GTA V ?
Los santos alone require a lot more of work than the entire just cause 2, believe Us

Even true crime l.a. had a huge map; boring as hell, repetitive and superficially rendered with mediocre graphics

3 ''big'' detailed cities + a big countryside with V's graphics = 2018
Oh wait, We'll probably have GTA VI then

zielarz119
  • zielarz119

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2013

#487

Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:02 PM

This is GTA V and San Andreas maps properly scaled:

v8vf.jpg


Insincere
  • Insincere

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2013
  • Unknown

#488

Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:21 PM

@up, you absolutely right:

 

mktu.jpg

  • Wolfhuman likes this

Wolfhuman
  • Wolfhuman

    crush on Amanda De Santa.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 May 2008
  • None

#489

Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:23 PM

Seriously, is this thread still active? First class troll work right here.

 

/////////////thread

  • Jackson T likes this

Geralt of Rivia
  • Geralt of Rivia

    Gwent Master

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • United-States
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#490

Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:25 PM Edited by TheMasterfocker, 17 December 2013 - 10:26 PM.

This is GTA V and San Andreas maps properly scaled:

v8vf.jpg

Haha, nope.

 

That means that SA is over or close to half the size of Los Santos. Which, even by your math measurements, isn't true.

 

Nice try. SA map is small, Los Santos is big, deal with it, cry harder, I dunno what to tell you.

  • Jackson T likes this

Wolfhuman
  • Wolfhuman

    crush on Amanda De Santa.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 May 2008
  • None

#491

Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:32 PM

Listen guys, we already know how much ft the map of GTA V is since it is written on the map. What if someone find the official number for gta san andreas, then we can all sleep well! But still, OP is a first class troll.


zielarz119
  • zielarz119

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2013

#492

Posted 17 December 2013 - 10:43 PM

you absolutely right:

 

another proof...

3vZwpC2.jpg

this is so fuking small


Geralt of Rivia
  • Geralt of Rivia

    Gwent Master

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • United-States
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#493

Posted 18 December 2013 - 12:07 AM Edited by TheMasterfocker, 18 December 2013 - 12:14 AM.

 

you absolutely right:

 

another proof...

3vZwpC2.jpg

this is so fuking small

 

:facedesk:

 

Are you serious?

 

Of course it's small when you're zoomed out of it so much that it looks like a god damn Life board. In that picture, about 1 inch = 1-2 blocks of city street.

 

It amazes me how you can't wrap your head around the obvious. It really does.

 

Also, look at the highway. It's a 4-lane highway on both sides. It looks like it's a one-lane road on the map you provided.

 

I, honest to god, don't understand how you can be so stupid that you provide that as evidence.

 

Plus, it's a 3D model. Everything looks smaller as a 3D model. You gonna tell me NYC is small? Because, hey, it looks it in this model! I would also find you a SA 3D model, but I cannot find a good one.

 

60784.jpg


zielarz119
  • zielarz119

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2013

#494

Posted 18 December 2013 - 12:51 AM

@up

 

actually this looks huge, don't you see those thousands of buildings?


Geralt of Rivia
  • Geralt of Rivia

    Gwent Master

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • United-States
  • April Fools Winner 2015

#495

Posted 18 December 2013 - 01:12 AM Edited by TheMasterfocker, 18 December 2013 - 01:46 AM.

@up

 

actually this looks huge, don't you see those thousands of buildings?

That's because NYC is f*cking huge. This does look big, but it looks smaller compared to the actual city. Also, every building is generated on the NYC map.They're not all generated on your map, which makes it look even smaller, because there's less things to scale with.

 

I mean, the map doesn't even allow scale. On your map, it looks like you could walk a couple steps and travel a whole block, or that you can climb up a mountain/hill in 20 seconds because the trail looks straight, when, in actuality, that's nowhere close to being true. What your map is; is a miniature.

 

I'll try to look for another example.

 

It's not a 3D map, but it works the same way: https://maps.google....ved=0CAgQ_AUoAg

 

Notice how, on the map, when zoomed out, it doesn't look like Albany is far away from Rotterdam at all. However, it is still quite a drive. About a 10-20 minute drive.

 

It's just all about perception. This isn't the same as a 3D model, but the point is the same. Just because something looks small, doesn't mean it is. Hence why GTA San Andreas isn't as small as people on here claim. It's still only 3.5x smaller than V's map, which is quite good. 14^2 is a good size.


Jackson T
  • Jackson T

    V>SA>Garbage>IV. End of Discussion.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2013
  • United-States

#496

Posted 21 December 2013 - 12:03 AM

you absolutely right:

 
another proof...
3vZwpC2.jpg
this is so fuking small

you absolutely right:

 
another proof...
3vZwpC2.jpg
this is so fuking small




All bulls***

Jackson T
  • Jackson T

    V>SA>Garbage>IV. End of Discussion.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2013
  • United-States

#497

Posted 21 December 2013 - 12:15 AM

Check these videos out on YouTube
San Andreas is not bigger than GTA 5's map proof heli fly over part 1 and 2
Enough said, San Andreas is finished
[quote name="zielarz119" post="1064320143" timestamp="1387317771"]This is GTA V and San Andreas maps properly scaled:
v8vf.jpg[/quote
You keep putting maps over maps, it doesn't help.

GTA V is bigger, only slightly. But Rockstar did make it out to be way bigger than it is. 
 
Liberty City was a better map, R* said they didn't want any wasted space. But in V they have contradicted themselves as about 60 % of it is just utterly pointless wasted space. There are like 3 animals FFS. It should have been filled with life and weirdo strangers, wasted opportunities.
 
The DLC will have to make use of areas like the prison, and military base for missions at least. Maybe have a manhunt in the wilderness, or Mount Chilliad, using STEALTH, another aspect that was pointless.


That's all BS

thejolf
  • thejolf

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2013

#498

Posted 21 December 2013 - 09:57 AM Edited by thejolf, 21 December 2013 - 10:57 AM.

I doubt it's bigger than all of them combined but I'm pretty sure it's bigger than SA.
SA seeming bigger is just an illusion created by the fact that there are three cities and a very low draw distance. I still own SA and played it fairly recently, honestly if you get in a car and jump on the highway you can get from south Los Santos to north Las Venturas in about 30 seconds.
In GTA V it takes quite a bit longer than that to get from south LS to the North East part of the map near Mount Chiliad.

house_party
  • house_party

    Player Hater

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2013

#499

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:00 AM Edited by house_party, 21 December 2013 - 10:01 AM.

Yeah. But SA feels bigger. That's what I'm looking for when I'm playing.

  • zielarz119 likes this

thivakar
  • thivakar

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2009
  • None

#500

Posted 21 December 2013 - 06:49 PM Edited by thivakar, 21 December 2013 - 06:50 PM.

Watered down country side is the reason i guess. Boring mountains lol


Wheatley
  • Wheatley

    it's dark in some places, but sunny everywhere else

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010
  • Scotland

#501

Posted 21 December 2013 - 08:47 PM

Yeah. But SA feels bigger. That's what I'm looking for when I'm playing.

 

As others have said it "feels bigger" because of the draw distance. If you install the x10 Draw distance mod you can see both San Fierro and Las Venturas from the top of the Los Santos Bank Tower.


zielarz119
  • zielarz119

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2013

#502

Posted 21 December 2013 - 09:22 PM

I still own SA and played it fairly recently, honestly if you get in a car and jump on the highway you can get from south Los Santos to north Las Venturas in about 30 seconds.

 

Your sir are idiot


fwenshy
  • fwenshy

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013

#503

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:08 PM Edited by fwenshy, 21 December 2013 - 10:12 PM.

http://news.rapgenius.com/1962703

This picture says it all really. Haha SA is sooooo small compared to GTAV. I Loved SA but you are a spastic if you think it is anywhere near the size of GTAV and I really worry for your mental health if you are still convinced by your deluded rose tinted views.

PS. You can't have an OPINION on a FACT and the FACT is GTAV is much much bigger. Los Santos alone is the size of SA.

zielarz119
  • zielarz119

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2013

#504

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:11 PM

http://news.rapgenius.com/1962703

This picture says it all really. Haha SA is sooooo small compared to GTAV. I Loved SA but you are a spastic if you think it is anywhere near the size of GTAV and I really worry for your mental health if you are still convinced by your deluded rose tinted views.

 

specific areas are smaller but the whole map of SA is not small because there is 3 cities and in V only one


fwenshy
  • fwenshy

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013

#505

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:14 PM


http://news.rapgenius.com/1962703

This picture says it all really. Haha SA is sooooo small compared to GTAV. I Loved SA but you are a spastic if you think it is anywhere near the size of GTAV and I really worry for your mental health if you are still convinced by your deluded rose tinted views.

 
specific areas are smaller but the whole map of SA is not small because there is 3 cities and in V only one

I'm not saying SA is small, it was BIG at the time. But now GTAV has completely eclipsed it.

zielarz119
  • zielarz119

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2013

#506

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:22 PM

 

 

http://news.rapgenius.com/1962703

This picture says it all really. Haha SA is sooooo small compared to GTAV. I Loved SA but you are a spastic if you think it is anywhere near the size of GTAV and I really worry for your mental health if you are still convinced by your deluded rose tinted views.

 
specific areas are smaller but the whole map of SA is not small because there is 3 cities and in V only one

I'm not saying SA is small, it was BIG at the time. But now GTAV has completely eclipsed it.

 

 

Maybe the problem is in difference between GTA III map (LC) and San Andreas (SA) in 3 years (with old technology tools to make it) and the HD era Liberty City and LS&BC because GTA V isn't as good as San Andreas was comapred to previous GTA's in terms of map.

 

Anyway I still believe San Andreas map was better because it had many types of land an 3 cities...


fwenshy
  • fwenshy

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013

#507

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:25 PM


 

 

http://news.rapgenius.com/1962703

This picture says it all really. Haha SA is sooooo small compared to GTAV. I Loved SA but you are a spastic if you think it is anywhere near the size of GTAV and I really worry for your mental health if you are still convinced by your deluded rose tinted views.

 
specific areas are smaller but the whole map of SA is not small because there is 3 cities and in V only one
I'm not saying SA is small, it was BIG at the time. But now GTAV has completely eclipsed it.
 
 
Maybe the problem is in difference between GTA III map (LC) and San Andreas (SA) in 3 years (with old technology tools to make it) and the HD era Liberty City and LS&BC because GTA V isn't as good as San Andreas was comapred to previous GTA's in terms of map.
 
Anyway I still believe San Andreas map was better because it had many types of land an 3 cities...

The argument isn't which is better, I agree that SA map was awesome. But it's still small.

zielarz119
  • zielarz119

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2013

#508

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:30 PM

It is small compared to V (GTA V's map is 2-2.5 times bigger) but after 10years I really expected something bigger, even another 50% of land with San Fierro would make the map 2 times bigger if not more


fwenshy
  • fwenshy

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013

#509

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:34 PM

Lets hope that they realised that the ps4/xbone was coming and halted development on GTAV and started secretly on GTAVI. 😜

Insincere
  • Insincere

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2013
  • Unknown

#510

Posted 21 December 2013 - 10:41 PM

 

 

 

http://news.rapgenius.com/1962703

This picture says it all really. Haha SA is sooooo small compared to GTAV. I Loved SA but you are a spastic if you think it is anywhere near the size of GTAV and I really worry for your mental health if you are still convinced by your deluded rose tinted views.

 
specific areas are smaller but the whole map of SA is not small because there is 3 cities and in V only one

I'm not saying SA is small, it was BIG at the time. But now GTAV has completely eclipsed it.

 

 

Maybe the problem is in difference between GTA III map (LC) and San Andreas (SA) in 3 years (with old technology tools to make it) and the HD era Liberty City and LS&BC because GTA V isn't as good as San Andreas was comapred to previous GTA's in terms of map.

 

Anyway I still believe San Andreas map was better because it had many types of land an 3 cities...

 

 

3 cites itself doesn't mean that map is big. Those cites were really small, even compared to GTA III LC and Vice City. It's the main problem with SA map. It had too much variety of everything on too small area. Looks ridiculous now, but it worked then -  with sh*tty draw distance, tricky highways and slow vehicles that made an illusion that map was much bigger than it really was. It can't be done like that anymore.

 

However whole SA map area is not so small - V's Los Santos is about that size.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users