Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

I think they've could done more with the desert.

80 replies to this topic
Proletariat
  • Proletariat

    Vice City ain't a Nice City

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2013

#61

Posted 20 January 2014 - 11:53 PM

 

Didn't mean to say lifeless, small mistake.

 

The desert is a bit too small for me, and less mysterious, because once you drove through there for the first time, you pretty much know the whole layout. Even at night it isn't really mysterious, because there was always that highway by the prison nearby, which eliminates any sense of mystery. Bone County and Tierra Robada where a bit more mysterious, being huge and with that purple sky. It also had a lot more towns and secrets, like the Mass Grave.

 

That said, I think they should add more secrets or easter eggs in the desert.

 

And get rid of the underwater world, so they can add more land to the desert.

 

 

That's what I just don't understand about failed aspect of GTA V's map. How is it possible that San Andreas can still do certain things on the map better than V can ? The wilderness areas of SA's map really felt remote, mysterious, and in some cases, downright eerie in places like the dark, lonely, hilly forests of Back 'O Beyond. In those parts of SA, you really felt detached from modern civilization like you were in a totally different realm. V's map had every opportunity to give us that feeling, but even better and it just did not happen. The desert still felt inhabited, the 'forest' was not really a forest, and too much of the wilderness was dominated by relatively inaccessible or hard to access mountainous areas. 

 

Always something to complain about GTA V, eh? Can't give it a break for once? Just want to be a hypocritical asshole because you didn't get what you want? And then if someone likes something about GTA V (like Trevor), then they have bad taste? Yeah, OK, obviously YOU know what you're doing and Rockstar doesn't? Ever thought about working for them so you could make it SO much better for yourself? 


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#62

Posted 21 January 2014 - 12:13 AM Edited by Official General, 21 January 2014 - 12:15 AM.

 

 

Didn't mean to say lifeless, small mistake.

 

The desert is a bit too small for me, and less mysterious, because once you drove through there for the first time, you pretty much know the whole layout. Even at night it isn't really mysterious, because there was always that highway by the prison nearby, which eliminates any sense of mystery. Bone County and Tierra Robada where a bit more mysterious, being huge and with that purple sky. It also had a lot more towns and secrets, like the Mass Grave.

 

That said, I think they should add more secrets or easter eggs in the desert.

 

And get rid of the underwater world, so they can add more land to the desert.

 

 

That's what I just don't understand about failed aspect of GTA V's map. How is it possible that San Andreas can still do certain things on the map better than V can ? The wilderness areas of SA's map really felt remote, mysterious, and in some cases, downright eerie in places like the dark, lonely, hilly forests of Back 'O Beyond. In those parts of SA, you really felt detached from modern civilization like you were in a totally different realm. V's map had every opportunity to give us that feeling, but even better and it just did not happen. The desert still felt inhabited, the 'forest' was not really a forest, and too much of the wilderness was dominated by relatively inaccessible or hard to access mountainous areas. 

 

Always something to complain about GTA V, eh? Can't give it a break for once? Just want to be a hypocritical asshole because you didn't get what you want? And then if someone likes something about GTA V (like Trevor), then they have bad taste? Yeah, OK, obviously YOU know what you're doing and Rockstar doesn't? Ever thought about working for them so you could make it SO much better for yourself? 

 

 

@ Proletariat

 

Firstly, don't be calling me an asshole - especially when I did not insult or attack you first.

 

Secondly, if you don't like my posts, you can just ignore them or put them on your ignore list. 

 

Thirdly, whatever I say about GTA V, Trevor or whatever is just my opinion. I never claimed it was fact, or that there was no other alternative but for everyone else to follow my tastes. 

 

Fourthly, if Rockstar asked me to work for them, then yeah I'd think about it, and YES, I believe I would have done a much better job.

 

I hope that answers your questions. Anymore personal insults or attacks, and consider this my last response to you on this subject. I'm no longer wasting my time beefing with people on here I don't even personally know. I'd apperciate it if you took heed of this warning. 

 

Cheers.


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#63

Posted 21 January 2014 - 12:19 AM Edited by Official General, 21 January 2014 - 12:23 AM.

@Official General:

SA had a really low draw distance which makes the map 'feel' big even though you are always technically right around the corner from a major city. Also question...when was the last time you sat down and played SA, for an hour or more?

 

Draw distance or not, makes no difference to me. What matters most was how it actually felt. In my view, SA's countryside and wilderness just felt more remote and away from modern civilization and human habitation, much more than GTA V's did, end of. 

 

I have not played SA for a very long time, but I have a good memory, and I remember everything about the map very well. 

 

 

It's possible that SA's countryside felt that way because it was literally dead out there. There was nothing except the wind, no wildlife, no bigfoot, etc

 

Well fair enough, I will admit that. SA's wilderness and countryside could have done with animal life, but it was very old technology, and I don't think free-roaming animal life had been yet done properly in open-world games at the time. GTA V's wildlife was pants, very mediocre at best. I barely saw any animals, apart from deer hoping around the roads, and a cougar once in a blue moon. It was so mediocre, that Rockstar should not even have bothered at times I thought. 

  • Canibitch likes this

Proletariat
  • Proletariat

    Vice City ain't a Nice City

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2013

#64

Posted 21 January 2014 - 12:46 AM

 

 

 

Didn't mean to say lifeless, small mistake.

 

The desert is a bit too small for me, and less mysterious, because once you drove through there for the first time, you pretty much know the whole layout. Even at night it isn't really mysterious, because there was always that highway by the prison nearby, which eliminates any sense of mystery. Bone County and Tierra Robada where a bit more mysterious, being huge and with that purple sky. It also had a lot more towns and secrets, like the Mass Grave.

 

That said, I think they should add more secrets or easter eggs in the desert.

 

And get rid of the underwater world, so they can add more land to the desert.

 

 

That's what I just don't understand about failed aspect of GTA V's map. How is it possible that San Andreas can still do certain things on the map better than V can ? The wilderness areas of SA's map really felt remote, mysterious, and in some cases, downright eerie in places like the dark, lonely, hilly forests of Back 'O Beyond. In those parts of SA, you really felt detached from modern civilization like you were in a totally different realm. V's map had every opportunity to give us that feeling, but even better and it just did not happen. The desert still felt inhabited, the 'forest' was not really a forest, and too much of the wilderness was dominated by relatively inaccessible or hard to access mountainous areas. 

 

Always something to complain about GTA V, eh? Can't give it a break for once? Just want to be a hypocritical asshole because you didn't get what you want? And then if someone likes something about GTA V (like Trevor), then they have bad taste? Yeah, OK, obviously YOU know what you're doing and Rockstar doesn't? Ever thought about working for them so you could make it SO much better for yourself? 

 

 

@ Proletariat

 

Firstly, don't be calling me an asshole - especially when I did not insult or attack you first.

 

Secondly, if you don't like my posts, you can just ignore them or put them on your ignore list. 

 

Thirdly, whatever I say about GTA V, Trevor or whatever is just my opinion. I never claimed it was fact, or that there was no other alternative but for everyone else to follow my tastes. 

 

Fourthly, if Rockstar asked me to work for them, then yeah I'd think about it, and YES, I believe I would have done a much better job.

 

I hope that answers your questions. Anymore personal insults or attacks, and consider this my last response to you on this subject. I'm no longer wasting my time beefing with people on here I don't even personally know. I'd apperciate it if you took heed of this warning. 

 

Cheers.

 

Sorry, I called you an asshole. That's the last personal insult you can expect from me. But here:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still Franklin

worst character in the game

 

 

And you are the worst character on GTAF. ;)

 

Anyway, on topic: Franklin was a quite neutral character the player could easily identify with, which is why he became the CENTRAL protagonist in the end. Take that greenrock.. Franklin was the central protagonist. In yo face...

 

 

@ greenrock

 

And your beloved Michael's life is in the hands of Franklin, so how do ya like him now ? :lol:

 

c ending is canon


Michael and Trevor.....are neck in neck

 

poor franklin

 

 

i remember franklin fans were getting all hyped up after the shift in popularity as he was actually the most popular character for a while on these forums after the character trailers were released.....before that michael and trevor where at the top

 

and now, it looks like mike and trev are at the top again

 

 

I'm fine with Michael being popular. But hey if people like a drug-addicted, bisexual, stinking, scruffy methhead like Trevor, then fine, that's on them. It just goes to show I hugely underestimated the poor tastes of some GTA fans.

 

I've said to you that Franklin is nothing special anyway. But he's still my most favored character, and he gets to decide if Michael or Trevor die. You can't beat that, no matter how you spin it b*tchboy.

 


Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#65

Posted 21 January 2014 - 12:51 AM Edited by Official General, 21 January 2014 - 12:54 AM.

@ Proletariat

 

That's just banter, well most of it. You can clearly see that. It's not like I'm very serious about all that. Yeah it reflects my opinions, but most of it is banter and wind-ups. You take this a little too seriously. Normally I would attack back, but apparently some people have been hurt by my attacks, so I'm refraining from it. Your attacks seem serious, so rather than me retaliate I'd rather just give a warning and ignore. 


Proletariat
  • Proletariat

    Vice City ain't a Nice City

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2013

#66

Posted 21 January 2014 - 12:55 AM

@Official General:

 

All I want to say is sorry for calling you an asshole, but I'm not the only one who engages in these kinds of "banter" as you put it. Two Wrongs don't make a Right, but I think we can agree that all of us are taking discussion of GTA V to new levels.


the_warbsta
  • the_warbsta

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2012
  • Australia

#67

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:02 AM

Back on topic?

Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#68

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:06 AM

@Official General:

 

All I want to say is sorry for calling you an asshole, but I'm not the only one who engages in these kinds of "banter" as you put it. Two Wrongs don't make a Right, but I think we can agree that all of us are taking discussion of GTA V to new levels.

 

It's ok bro. all I can say to you or anyone else is if you don't like my opinions, either challenge them or ignore them. There is no need for personal attacks, when at the end of the day it's just a video game. 

  • Proletariat likes this

Fail_At_GTA
  • Fail_At_GTA

    Actually awesome at GTA

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 May 2012

#69

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:07 AM

Actually, the desert feels too full of life to me.  There's houses, roads, buildings everywhere.

  • visionist and Cutter De Blanc like this

Raavi
  • Raavi

    Mornings are for coffee and contemplation

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2012
  • European-Union
  • Best Moderator 2016
    Best Moderator 2015
    Best Moderator 2014
    Winner of World Cup 2014 Prediction League
    Best Forum Ledby 2013
    Most Improved 2013

#70

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:07 AM Edited by Raavi, 21 January 2014 - 01:13 AM.

I first and foremost want to applaud you for trying to resolve your quarrel in a civil manner. However, please next time try not to get in a personal argument, rather resolve any and all disagreements ad rem.

 

Anyhow, lets not clutter this thread any further and get back on-topic. Shall we?

  • Cutter De Blanc and Proletariat like this

dyz
  • dyz

    GTA For Life!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2009
  • None

#71

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:45 AM

For those who don't know, or keep bringing up Las Venturas, there's a desert area in SoCal, Palm Deserts and Sky Valley, it's supposed to be based on these:

 

palm-desert_l1.jpg

 

interior-about-palmdesert.jpg

 

palm-desert.jpg

 

palm_desert_ca.jpg

 

3552782288_207b849d54.jpg

 

1058574-1202271322519129-p.jpg

 

8914531-the-devil-s-cornfield-below-the-

GTA 5 king of looks like that only a smaller version just like the city is a smaller version of LA. 


ZZCOOL
  • ZZCOOL

    http://www.youtube.com/user/taltigolt

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Feb 2009
  • Sweden

#72

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:49 AM

For those who don't know, or keep bringing up Las Venturas, there's a desert area in SoCal, Palm Deserts and Sky Valley, it's supposed to be based on these:

 

palm-desert_l1.jpg

 

interior-about-palmdesert.jpg

 

palm-desert.jpg

 

palm_desert_ca.jpg

 

3552782288_207b849d54.jpg

 

1058574-1202271322519129-p.jpg

 

8914531-the-devil-s-cornfield-below-the-

imagine all that in gta 5 druel

 

but all hope is not lost stilldre can do all this when we have modding :)


dyz
  • dyz

    GTA For Life!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2009
  • None

#73

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:56 AM

If every one wants a big desert area they should wait because im sure R* will make a GTA back in Las venturas! :D


Proletariat
  • Proletariat

    Vice City ain't a Nice City

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2013

#74

Posted 21 January 2014 - 02:41 AM

My gripe about the desert region of GTA V is that, although I love the Grand Senora Desert and Sandy Shores "feel", I feel that is could have been made as vast as RDR's landscape. At least a fourth of that. Okay, let's keep the entire Los Santos areas and environs as it is, but take out Paleto Bay Area, Fort Zancudo, and Mount Josiah and convert it to desert similar to RDR. Put the military base smack dab in the middle of the desert. We can add a mini Las Venturas somewhere in there. Then Rockstar should have proceeded to duplicate the Tejon Pass area between the Tecahapi Mountains and San Emigido Mountains with the I-5 cutting right through it all the way to the Central Valley. R* should have also proceeded to extend south-east of the in-game Palomino Highlands and add a San Diego like city. To be honest, my biggest gripe with GTA V is the layout of the map and how it really didn't catch the SoCal feel. What could've been done it make a map to incorporate the cities of Los Angeles, Las Vegas, and San Diego (and its environs). The is should have comprised the Southwest and South Eastern Portion of the map. Northeast and Northwest areas of the map should've been devoted to solely desert and a little bit of forest wilderness. I'll draw a sketch (sometime) (it won't be overly detailed, but I think a lot of GTAFourmers would want a map like this) to show what I mean. I don't live in the SoCal region, but I'm familiar with its geography (quite well). Anyways, I hope the next the location is Vice City. But, R* should seriously think about a LA, San Diego, and Las Vegas, plus natural wilderness map if they really want to please the fans. 


Proletariat
  • Proletariat

    Vice City ain't a Nice City

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2013

#75

Posted 21 January 2014 - 04:54 AM

 

@Official General:

 

All I want to say is sorry for calling you an asshole, but I'm not the only one who engages in these kinds of "banter" as you put it. Two Wrongs don't make a Right, but I think we can agree that all of us are taking discussion of GTA V to new levels.

 

It's ok bro. all I can say to you or anyone else is if you don't like my opinions, either challenge them or ignore them. There is no need for personal attacks, when at the end of the day it's just a video game. 

 

You'll find that I agree with most of your opinions/statements, but not the way they are presented. We think Vice City is the best GTA, Tommy Vercetti is the best, GTA V needs a better more inclusive map with more wilderness, GTA V needed more crime activities like gang wars, drug wars, mafia business, ability to purchase MEANINGFUL Real Estate and Business BEFORE you make you millions in the "The Big One" Heist, more customization options for cars, haircuts, clothing, casino/gambling activities missions, more than the 69 missions, more character development (personally 60 missions for each protagonist IN ADDITION to the 70 storyline missions and 20 Side Missions, Fire Truck/Ambulance/Vigilante Missions, No GTA Online, and more cities in the map. But, I still think that without them GTA V is nearly a masterpiece of a game because I just had pure amounts of fun with it. I can't remember having this much fun with a game since San Andreas. 

  • visionist and Osho like this

Official General
  • Official General

    I'm from Broker, LC, we always carry heat around here.

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#76

Posted 21 January 2014 - 01:29 PM

 

 

@Official General:

 

All I want to say is sorry for calling you an asshole, but I'm not the only one who engages in these kinds of "banter" as you put it. Two Wrongs don't make a Right, but I think we can agree that all of us are taking discussion of GTA V to new levels.

 

It's ok bro. all I can say to you or anyone else is if you don't like my opinions, either challenge them or ignore them. There is no need for personal attacks, when at the end of the day it's just a video game. 

 

You'll find that I agree with most of your opinions/statements, but not the way they are presented. We think Vice City is the best GTA, Tommy Vercetti is the best, GTA V needs a better more inclusive map with more wilderness, GTA V needed more crime activities like gang wars, drug wars, mafia business, ability to purchase MEANINGFUL Real Estate and Business BEFORE you make you millions in the "The Big One" Heist, more customization options for cars, haircuts, clothing, casino/gambling activities missions, more than the 69 missions, more character development (personally 60 missions for each protagonist IN ADDITION to the 70 storyline missions and 20 Side Missions, Fire Truck/Ambulance/Vigilante Missions, No GTA Online, and more cities in the map. But, I still think that without them GTA V is nearly a masterpiece of a game because I just had pure amounts of fun with it. I can't remember having this much fun with a game since San Andreas. 

 

 

Not meaning to go back to this, just to point out that it's not me who makes the threads that criticize GTA V - because many of these kind of threads are in line with my views on the game, I feel compelled to post comments on them, as anyone else naturally would. Just saying, that's all.

 

On topic, to be honest, I did not have a great deal of fun playing the game all through it. Many parts I did, but quite a number of other parts I did not. I liked it, just not enough. GTA IV was a similar experience for me the first time I played it, then it GREATLY improved with EFLC. 

  • Proletariat likes this

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#77

Posted 21 January 2014 - 02:01 PM

Actually, the desert feels too full of life to me.  There's houses, roads, buildings everywhere.

 

I agree with this to some extent - there are times where I feel like I'm never quite out in wilderness... but there are other times where I'm out there without a vehicle and think 'f*ck this, I'm switching character because I just cannot be arsed getting wheels right now).


BLOOD
  • BLOOD

    By: Blood-Is-in-Diamond or BiiD

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2013
  • None
  • Take-Two Analyst of the Year

#78

Posted 21 January 2014 - 02:16 PM


Actually, the desert feels too full of life to me.  There's houses, roads, buildings everywhere.

 
I agree with this to some extent - there are times where I feel like I'm never quite out in wilderness... but there are other times where I'm out there without a vehicle and think 'f*ck this, I'm switching character because I just cannot be arsed getting wheels right now).

Lol :) this comment just showed how the 3 Protagonists System is Great.if you dont get me read your last line.

..GhosT
  • ..GhosT

    GTAForums Veteran

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2009
  • None

#79

Posted 21 January 2014 - 03:45 PM

GTAIV2011-07-1203-46-37-03.jpg

 

Does seem small... but once youre in the city its actually big. Everywhere its big.. you had different stuff everywhere, you had all types of map in this!

Especially the citys spread across the map made the countryside big and useful..

 

V's map however.. after the story or in online - why would you go out of los santos. Everything you want is in Los Santos.


Luuk'
  • Luuk'

    Sup

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2013
  • Nigeria

#80

Posted 21 January 2014 - 04:20 PM

GTAIV2011-07-1203-46-37-03.jpg

 

Does seem small... but once youre in the city its actually big. Everywhere its big.. you had different stuff everywhere, you had all types of map in this!

Especially the citys spread across the map made the countryside big and useful..

 

V's map however.. after the story or in online - why would you go out of los santos. Everything you want is in Los Santos.

 

For beautiful sights and pics maybe...?


confederatestatesgta
  • confederatestatesgta

    rip andrea. a great twd character.

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 May 2013
  • United-States

#81

Posted 26 January 2014 - 08:48 AM

i totaly agree today i was trying to find a place in the desert that i couldent see any roads or modern day stuff. but no such luck. i love the desert but it does feel way to small when im in a helicopter or a plane you can see the whole desert and it was annoying it also looked like there was some desert when the map looked like grass. i think they should have took out the alamo sea and kept it with desert and make the desert extend all the way to fort zancudo like area 69. and have some sandstorms like gta sa.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users