Jump to content

» «

which gta had the better map? san andreas or v

8 replies to this topic
  • pokemon123


  • Joined: 26 Oct 2013
  • None


Posted 26 October 2013 - 06:32 PM

i'll admit i have not played both but i would have to say andreas, 5 looks like a city with a bunch of country side, while san andreas had 3 cities, both of which look very different from eachother plus desert and countryside, what i mean is that there is more variety

  • Tycek

    Being a bastard works.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2009
  • Poland


Posted 26 October 2013 - 07:17 PM

Definitely V as this map is simply more logical, full of details and nice to drive around. SA map was big, but that's pretty much everything that can be said about it.

Toby dog
  • Toby dog

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2013


Posted 26 October 2013 - 08:17 PM

must be kidding.

  • GTAKid667

    The Bad Fella™

  • GTA Series Staff
  • Joined: 24 May 2010
  • United-Kingdom
  • Most Helpful [GTA] 2013
    Contribution Award [Chain Game]
    Contribution Award [GTA III]


Posted 26 October 2013 - 09:17 PM

GTA V by far in my opinion - As Tycek says, its full of details while SA's rendition was pretty lifeless in the countryside and had quite small cities to be fair.

  • Lock n' Stock and Don Fraser like this

Don Fraser
  • Don Fraser

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Oct 2013


Posted 26 October 2013 - 11:33 PM

SA- For me the pull of the 3 cities and the different activities they offered you surpassed the very self centred GTA 5 map. Everything opened doors in SA and there was so much more ideas I could think to use the map in my free time playing it compared to GTA 5

  • universetwisters

    brb sitting in my 85 Skylark as it idles in the garage

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Feb 2011
  • United-States
  • Best Total Overhaul 2017 [GTA: Underground]
    Best Map 2017 Contribution [Liberty City Countryside]
    Best Conversion 2016 [GTA: Underground] [Contribution]
    Best Workshop 2014
    Most Improved 2014
    Funniest Member 2014
    April Fools Winner 2015


Posted 26 October 2013 - 11:47 PM

V had a much better map. I'd rather have one realistic city as opposed to three bland cities.

  • Lock n' Stock likes this

Algonquin Assassin
  • Algonquin Assassin

    We're all looking for that special someone

  • Victim of The Pit™
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Moderator 2017
    Most Obsessive Name Changer 2016 (My unofficial GTAF annual award)
    Biggest Fanboy 2013, 2014, 2015
    Best Poster [GTA] 2014
    Best Member in the OGA 2012


Posted 27 October 2013 - 12:53 AM

GTA V easily. I'll take a more realistically scaled map over a horribly condensed one with three small cities any day.

  • ExtremoMania

    Been saving it for a rainy day...

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2012
  • Philippines


Posted 27 October 2013 - 02:55 AM

Technically, GTA V map of course. Even though GTA San Andreas includes deserts, countryside, and three different cities, nothing can be compared of GTA V's realistic design with a gigantic city as compared to the condensed three cities wherein they're just too small as compared to Los Santos today.

Pooyan Cyrus
  • Pooyan Cyrus

    Drake stole my notebook :(

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2013
  • Mars
  • Helpfulness Award [Concepts]
    Best Concept Story 2013 "Grand Theft Auto: Ultimate"
    April Fools Winner 2015


Posted 27 October 2013 - 05:21 PM

V's one.
It's way more realistic and similar to California while SA wasn't really California-ish.
It had Las Vegas and Sierra Nevada while they aren't in CA. SA map was like GTA1's maps, which had rectangular shapes and even the shape of map wasn't realistic.
However, V's map lacked of Whetstone, Red County and San Fierro. San Fierro is really underrated, because R* did a poor job on that. They made it little while San Francisco is an awesome big city.

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users