Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Every Map Being an Island

108 replies to this topic

Poll: Every Map Being an Island (40 member(s) have cast votes)

What Would You Prefer for the Next GTA Map?

  1. Island (24 votes [60.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

  2. Invisible Barrier (2 votes [5.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.00%

  3. Infinite Desert/Empty Land (hills,fields) on PC & Next-Gen (14 votes [35.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 35.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote
theGTAking101
  • theGTAking101

    "Get out of my sight, or I'll kill you."

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2013
  • Canada

#1

Posted 07 February 2014 - 03:56 AM Edited by TheCornking101, 01 March 2014 - 11:50 PM.

Every GTA map to date has been island, which is unrealistic, especially in GTA V.

 

The least they could do is have an invisible barrier of land on the outside of the map or better yet have an endless desert, although that might only be possible on PC or Next-Gen consoles. Keep the ocean on the western side of the map, move Paleto Bay to the western side too. Because Southern California doesn't have ocean on the north, east and south.

  • universetwisters likes this

hornedturtle
  • hornedturtle

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2013
  • None

#2

Posted 07 February 2014 - 04:00 AM

Every GTA map to date has been island, which is unrealistic, especially in GTA V.
 
The least they could do is have an invisible barrier of land on the outside of the map. They did it very well with Red Dead Redemption and L.A. Noire so they could easily add unclimbable mountains or something. Keep the ocean on the western side of the map, move Paleto Bay to the western side too. Because California doesn't have ocean on the north, east and south.


invisible wall< empty ocean. I hate when games put invisible walls in. It breaks immersion and leaves me feeling like theres more to explore outside the map
  • Matty, blowtorchrepair, lol232 and 5 others like this

theGTAking101
  • theGTAking101

    "Get out of my sight, or I'll kill you."

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2013
  • Canada

#3

Posted 07 February 2014 - 04:01 AM

 

Every GTA map to date has been island, which is unrealistic, especially in GTA V.
 
The least they could do is have an invisible barrier of land on the outside of the map. They did it very well with Red Dead Redemption and L.A. Noire so they could easily add unclimbable mountains or something. Keep the ocean on the western side of the map, move Paleto Bay to the western side too. Because California doesn't have ocean on the north, east and south.


invisible wall< empty ocean. I hate when games put invisible walls in. It breaks immersion and leaves me feeling like theres more to explore outside the map

 

More realistic though


Justin..
  • Justin..

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2013

#4

Posted 07 February 2014 - 04:06 AM

Not really convenient when players have aircraft access though.


It'll feel like we are all part of our own Truman Show lol
  • GamerShotgun, Matty, Target13 and 5 others like this

theGTAking101
  • theGTAking101

    "Get out of my sight, or I'll kill you."

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2013
  • Canada

#5

Posted 07 February 2014 - 04:09 AM

Not really convenient when players have aircraft access though.


It'll feel like we are all part of our own Truman Show lol

Yeah I had that in mind, instead of an invisible barrier they could add an infinite area of land (copy/paste of course) and have the engines shut off when you go too far like they do with the ocean.


Officer Ronson
  • Officer Ronson

    ''Cool it, assholes''

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 May 2011
  • United-States

#6

Posted 07 February 2014 - 04:17 AM

The whole thing being an island is a metaphor because characters dont seem to give two sh*ts about whats out there, beyond the sea.

  • lizardman563, universetwisters, WorldWideFM and 4 others like this

cp1dell
  • cp1dell

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2008
  • None

#7

Posted 07 February 2014 - 04:58 AM Edited by cp1dell, 07 February 2014 - 04:59 AM.

There's no secret meaning of symbolism, and realism obviously isn't a factor. No.

 

It's engine limitations. It doesn't matter if "invisible walls are more realistic" - you have to have some suspension of disbelief. It worked in Red Dead Redemption and LA Noire because you weren't flying around in the sky in those games. You were stuck to land, and the invisible walls you encountered were usually steep mountains or some kind of road block. It gave you the idea that there was something more, but you couldn't see it.

 

It's always been like this in GTA. III had a little bit of both, with that blocked off tunnel on the third island - and the plane that could barely fly higher than two stories. And it's always been a perfectly fine design. Nobody wants to fly around and all of a sudden crash into some invisible wall. And infinite land mass surrounding the entire map, or just one side of the map wouldn't work and would look really odd.

 

Are you people seriously running out of sh*t to complain about with V, that you're resorting to such trivial things to bitch about? Can't say I'm surprised.

  • TJGM, blakeney, Target13 and 5 others like this

gunziness
  • gunziness

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2010
  • Argentina

#8

Posted 07 February 2014 - 05:04 AM

Its not a complain about gta v is more of a complain of gta in general i think.
The infinite land idea is not that bad, having a straigh route with no (or little) traffic, you can give supercars a good use that way.
  • theGTAking101 likes this

lazloisdavrock
  • lazloisdavrock

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2008
  • None

#9

Posted 07 February 2014 - 05:17 AM

http://kotaku.com/59...n-one-big-world


dyz
  • dyz

    GTA For Life!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2009
  • None

#10

Posted 07 February 2014 - 05:18 AM

GTA 3 had invisible walls 

  • ZakMc likes this

Jimbatron
  • Jimbatron

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Jan 2009
  • United-Kingdom

#11

Posted 07 February 2014 - 07:02 AM

 

Not really convenient when players have aircraft access though.


It'll feel like we are all part of our own Truman Show lol

Yeah I had that in mind, instead of an invisible barrier they could add an infinite area of land (copy/paste of course) and have the engines shut off when you go too far like they do with the ocean.

 

 

I guess it is because it is easier to make the sea aesthetically pleasing. If you have land beyond the mountains, you've got to expend a lot of resource making it look detailed and different from up in the air, otherwise it will just look low res and a bit crappy.

 

I agree it would feel better in principle it it wasn't an Island, but I think it is a compromise versus graphical limitations.


TJGM
  • TJGM

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2011
  • Ireland
  • Helpfulness Award
    Contribution Award [Mods]

#12

Posted 07 February 2014 - 07:08 AM

Its not a complain about gta v is more of a complain of gta in general i think.
The infinite land idea is not that bad, having a straigh route with no (or little) traffic, you can give supercars a good use that way.


That sounds stupid.. really stupid.

JStarr31
  • JStarr31

    Vice Money Murder Gang {V.$.M.G}

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2012
  • United-States

#13

Posted 07 February 2014 - 07:32 AM

Every GTA map to date has been island, which is unrealistic, especially in GTA V.
 
The least they could do is have an invisible barrier of land on the outside of the map. They did it very well with Red Dead Redemption and L.A. Noire so they could easily add unclimbable mountains or something. Keep the ocean on the western side of the map, move Paleto Bay to the western side too. Because California doesn't have ocean on the north, east and south.


Look it's like this, in every GTA since III, the map has been made into an island to represent the portion of the area that is familiar to the protagonist. Even IRL, I ONLY know an 'x' amount of my state/city, so if I where to draw a map of the only areas within my city I know, the map would look a lot like an island with the 'water' areas being the unknown. Thus this is how GTA maps are meant to portray a region.

Even though the rest of SA actually exist and is most likely attached to V's island mass by land, we have only the represented area of the map that the protagonists would know (or even care about, that's why Yankton seems like there's an ocean between the states when really it's just water being used as a metaphor for unknown, unseen, or otherwise not cared about areas - unless otherwise noted as a lake or river, etc)

So the map of GTA V is just a piece of land "broken off" of the rest of the state for gameplay purposes, mainly because crashing your jet plane into an 'invisible wall' going full speed would just be the worst.... Also computer generated land isn't R* style, every inch better be hand-made or go to EA with that sh*t...
  • Ermac, PeriodZeroHero and Gunslinger_GK like this

Budweiser Addict
  • Budweiser Addict

    That's, just, like, your opinion man

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2012

#14

Posted 07 February 2014 - 07:55 AM

I'm fine with the infinite sea. I just think of it as if sea levels rose faster in the GTA universe than in real life.
  • Luddite and krashr like this

Dope_0110
  • Dope_0110

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#15

Posted 07 February 2014 - 09:06 AM

With the maps being so big it doesn't even feel like it's an island at all (unless you fly or look at the map). So why would you complain about it. It's always been like this and it never made me feel like it's cut out from the rest of the world. I always felt the rest of the world is right there, with us confine to one city/state.

  • dyz, Luddite, PeriodZeroHero and 1 other like this

mambonutz
  • mambonutz

    Northern Canuck

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2013
  • Canada

#16

Posted 07 February 2014 - 09:23 AM

Are you people seriously running out of sh*t to complain about with V, that you're resorting to such trivial things to bitch about? Can't say I'm surprised.

That's too funny! This is my reply to a thread just the other day...great minds think alike.  lol

 

 

quote:  The saddest thing I've witnessed?

 

            The pages upon pages upon pages of pissing, moaning and whining, about every little minute aspect of the game...over and over and over, again.

 

            Not what you were looking for, but I feel it had to be said. ;)


BlackNoise
  • BlackNoise

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2011
  • None

#17

Posted 07 February 2014 - 09:37 AM

R* rarely describes GTA maps as cities or states. They call them worlds. People get too literal with the inspiration for these worlds.

It's not California. It's not even really San Andreas(at least not yet). LA Noire and RDR are not very good examples, because those are supposed to be taken more literally when it comes to their inspiration. Los Santos is simply inspired by Southern California's culture, look, and feel. It's probably an island, because it's more important for a game like GTA V to offer the freedom to fly, drive, and boat(?) around the entire world. GTA only exists because R* loves that type of freedom. Otherwise, we would be talking about a R* developed cop series. 


Osho
  • Osho

    Old School RPG'er

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#18

Posted 07 February 2014 - 09:54 AM Edited by Osho, 07 February 2014 - 09:59 AM.

The least they could do is have an invisible barrier of land on the outside of the map. They did it very well with Red Dead Redemption and L.A. Noire so they could easily add unclimbable mountains or something.

 

Those unclimbable mountains or something serve what purpose? Facepalming every time I see those unrealistic boundaries? That's so old fashioned, rather how much believable GTA V shows the efforts put into the map to keep it as close to realism.

I think you ran out of any criticism towards the map that you finally picked this irrelevant stuff to prove once again how much the map sucks.


Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#19

Posted 07 February 2014 - 09:56 AM

I'll tell you what's unrealistic -flying in a plane and finding a row of mountains you can't fly over. 

 

A desert that goes on forever and has nothing in it. That's pretty unrealistic. 

 

It's the only feasible way to do it, if you want to maintain the vehicle types that are available in GTA.

 

/thread, go home. 

  • lol232, Alastair Smyth, Luddite and 3 others like this

~Tiger~
  • ~Tiger~

  • GTA Series Staff
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2014
  • None
  • Best Ledby 2015
    Best Ledby 2014
    Helpfulness Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [GTA V]

#20

Posted 07 February 2014 - 10:07 AM

Every GTA map to date has been island, which is unrealistic

 

The least they could do is have an invisible barrier 

 

 

How can an 'island' possibly be unrealistic?

 

And how can an 'invisible barrier' possibly be more realistic?

 

:panic:

  • Fuzzknuckles, lol232, Osho and 2 others like this

Excolis
  • Excolis

    Well,...

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 May 2013

#21

Posted 07 February 2014 - 10:13 AM

R* rarely describes GTA maps as cities or states. They call them worlds. People get too literal with the inspiration for these worlds.

It's not California. It's not even really San Andreas(at least not yet). LA Noire and RDR are not very good examples, because those are supposed to be taken more literally when it comes to their inspiration. Los Santos is simply inspired by Southern California's culture, look, and feel. It's probably an island, because it's more important for a game like GTA V to offer the freedom to fly, drive, and boat(?) around the entire world. GTA only exists because R* loves that type of freedom. Otherwise, we would be talking about a R* developed cop series. 

I don't think it has a deeper meaning when R* is using the word 'world'. It's just a synonym. And the map is definitely and official the southern part of the US state of San Andreas.


BLOOD-MOND
  • BLOOD-MOND

    By: Blood-Is-in-Diamond or BiiD

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Dec 2013
  • None

#22

Posted 07 February 2014 - 11:24 AM

Rockstar are the "gods of openworld games" they
prove that to the industry with the GTA franchise
and That has existed for almost 17 years (1997-2014) even before all these modern day Openworld Franchises (GTA Clones) i.e.Saint Row Series (2006-2014),Assassins Creed (2007-2014) etc.GTA is the
Ruler of the Genre and it as the greatest impact not only in the genre but in the Industry,so why should the Ruler (king) of the Openworld/Sandbox Genre put a "Barrier in Freedom",i cant see that happening.

JANTSUU
  • JANTSUU

    Wanted Level: ★★★★★

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2008
  • Finland
  • Best Video 2012 [GTA V Trailer with Niko, Luis and Johnny]

#23

Posted 07 February 2014 - 11:34 AM

Every GTA map to date has been island, which is unrealistic, especially in GTA V.

 

The least they could do is have an invisible barrier of land on the outside of the map. They did it very well with Red Dead Redemption and L.A. Noire so they could easily add unclimbable mountains or something. Keep the ocean on the western side of the map, move Paleto Bay to the western side too. Because California doesn't have ocean on the north, east and south.

I hate invisible walls. 

Invisible walls worked in RDR because there was no planes but would be stupid in GTA.

And GTA V is set in San Andreas, not California so it's not even trying to be exact copy of real world.


Luddite
  • Luddite

    Ho Rider

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2012

#24

Posted 07 February 2014 - 11:40 AM

There are no invisible boundries in RDR. There are cliffs and rivers. If John Marston could swim or fly then they wouldn't pose an issue as they do not our protags.

Endless land begs to be explored. Endless space(or sea in this instance) not so much.

Xcommunicated
  • Xcommunicated

    A Stitch in Time C9

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2002
  • United-States

#25

Posted 07 February 2014 - 11:42 AM

The irony is that with GTA V's San Andreas map being an island, it serves as a parody of the joke about Southern California breaking off into the Pacific Ocean when the next massive earthquake occurs at the San Andreas Fault Zone, hence the fictional name of the state - San Andreas.

Otherwise, the island concept has always worked well for GTA. It will be interesting to see how they connect all the maps should they go forward with building one massive world with all GTA cities i.e. if they leave them all as separate islands or if they connect them all with land mass to form one huge island.

  • PeriodZeroHero likes this

TheTechPoTaToCHIP
  • TheTechPoTaToCHIP

    Tech Knight

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2013
  • None

#26

Posted 07 February 2014 - 12:32 PM

Dude, Rockstar themselves explained why they do this. They say that they want the maps to feel "Complete" so they try to avoid to put invisible barriers as much as possible.

Plus the fact that this game has aircraft and with my airplane crashing into a invisible wall just for realism is just annoying. 


llllI1llllI1
  • llllI1llllI1

    Ghetto Star

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2011

#27

Posted 07 February 2014 - 12:34 PM

GTAIII wasn't an island. So you're wrong. Not every GTA.  :colgate:


CloudHigh
  • CloudHigh

    MJ2

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2013
  • None

#28

Posted 07 February 2014 - 12:40 PM

SA was 3 islands. LS being on an island is naturl.

Also is there a need for a thread complianing over something so trivial? Rockstar has always done this, why change now?

Like many have also stated Rockstar used barriers and unclimable mountians in LA Noire and RDR because you are stuck on the ground and cannot truly see beyond them. In Gta you can fly therfore they would have to waste money detailing the outside of the world simply for esthetics and nothing more.

GTAIII wasn't an island. So you're wrong. Not every GTA.  :colgate:


Your right, it is 3 islands....

MiamiViceCity
  • MiamiViceCity

    The Harwood Butcher

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • 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

#29

Posted 07 February 2014 - 12:45 PM

The irony is that with GTA V's San Andreas map being an island, it serves as a parody of the joke about Southern California breaking off into the Pacific Ocean when the next massive earthquake occurs at the San Andreas Fault Zone, hence the fictional name of the state - San Andreas.
Otherwise, the island concept has always worked well for GTA. It will be interesting to see how they connect all the maps should they go forward with building one massive world with all GTA cities i.e. if they leave them all as separate islands or if they connect them all with land mass to form one huge island.


Agreed. While we have swimming, boats, helicopters and planes islands work fine.

Funnily enough while I don't think much of the game itself I feel SA does the best job at deceiving the player in thinking it's one land mass than just a big island.

R* need a map layout similar to SA's again IMO. It never really felt like an island to me even though it was.
  • SkylineGTRFreak, Luddite and theGTAking101 like this

poklane
  • poklane

    So now what?

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Jun 2012
  • Netherlands

#30

Posted 07 February 2014 - 12:52 PM

I'll take an ocean over invisible barriers any day. Also, have you ever though about how aircraft would work with invisible barriers? No, you haven't.

  • Alastair Smyth and calearne like this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users