Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

How would you rate the map of GTA V?

253 replies to this topic

Poll: How would you rate the map of V? (293 member(s) have cast votes)

On a scale of 1-10, how would you rate it?

  1. 1 (Absolutely sh*tty) (11 votes [3.75%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.75%

  2. 2 (Awful) (1 votes [0.34%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.34%

  3. 3 (Poor) (4 votes [1.37%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.37%

  4. 4 (Below average) (16 votes [5.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.46%

  5. 5 (Average) (22 votes [7.51%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.51%

  6. 6 (Above average) (20 votes [6.83%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.83%

  7. 7 (Good map overall, despite some major flaws) (89 votes [30.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.38%

  8. 8 (Very good map with some minor flaws) (72 votes [24.57%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.57%

  9. 9 (An extremely well-crafted map) (37 votes [12.63%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.63%

  10. 10 (Just perfect, best map in the series) (21 votes [7.17%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.17%

Vote Guests cannot vote
Son of Zeus
  • Son of Zeus

    Still King

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2014
  • Australia

#1

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:08 AM Edited by Son of Zeus, 17 February 2016 - 11:15 AM.

I'd say it's a 7. Good map overall, despite some major flaws. The layout is bad in places, so the Paleto Forest doesn't feel like a forest and the Grand Senora Desert is neither grand nor does it feel like a desert. Also, the mountains are too many and feel like filler. All these flaws are IMO of course.

Still, it's a good map to drive around and take in the scenery or just fool around.

Rate above + reasons below.
  • Algonquin Assassin, rampage08, Tupiz and 5 others like this

Blackened
  • Blackened

    Fan of all GTAs

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2014
  • Scotland

#2

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:09 AM

8/10

Flaws aren't significant enough to hamper my enjoyment, but could be better.
  • Heists, Misunderstood and DimitriFaustin like this

Cheatz_N_Trickz
  • Cheatz_N_Trickz

    Foot Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2013

#3

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:17 AM

It's a 6 for me, if it was just LS, it would be a 7, but the countryside is just so undeveloped and wasteful it knocks it down one.
  • MikeMyth, CartmanKusanagi, rampage08 and 3 others like this

Algonquin Assassin
  • Algonquin Assassin

    We're all looking for that special someone

  • 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

#4

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:19 AM

7/10. Whilst it's indeed a very nice looking and detailed map I just don't get the sense that it's really bigger than SA, RDR and GTA IV combined. I also don't like the "crater" like feel by the surrounding mountains.

 

So whilst it's visually quite stunning I think design and structure could be much better.

  • DIEXEL, DANIEL3GS, JohnWeazel and 4 others like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#5

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:24 AM

Based on the vanila version, sadly the game has a lot of wasted space, and so I'm inclined to give a 6, but since I'm playing because of the awesome PC version and fabulous mods, I'd say, 8.
For the topic; 6.
  • rampage08 and CarlitoDorito like this

shadowoperative
  • shadowoperative

    GTAO IS GOAT

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2015
  • United-States

#6

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:28 AM

A 9 out of 10. Sandy Shores and Paleto Bay are amazing.
  • Sonny3787, Osho, monkb4skunk and 1 other like this

UshaB
  • UshaB

    Nacho Libre - "I wanna weeeeeen!"

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2014
  • Australia

#7

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:32 AM

7/10. It looks nice. It didn't feel up to potential, not sure why. Maybe the pedestrians needed to tone down the satire. The mountains felt underused. I feel like it needed a secret cabin, or  cave that led to an underground mine or underneath the water fall. Needed more trees. I wanted to see a big motherf*cking lumberjack dude cuttin' down some fresh wood. Also, I feel like Sandy Shores could of been expanded somehow. It needs more interiors, interiors everyyyyyyyywherrrrrrrrrrrre.

  • CartmanKusanagi, Son of Zeus and R3CON like this

CarlitoDorito
  • CarlitoDorito

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#8

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:42 AM Edited by CarlitoDorito, 17 February 2016 - 11:42 AM.

9. Incredibly detailed and more varied than any map I've seen in a game. Needs more interiors.
  • Sonny3787, 65536, Osho and 1 other like this

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#9

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:46 AM

Gave it a 9. I love how smooth the transition between environments is when you're on the freeway and the variety itself is impressive. LS is a well balanced city considering how well it's been designed to reflect the goings on in the story. The mountains look stunning and provide a lot of goofy play opportunities. The sea and the undersea world are beautiful and terrifying at depth. Raton Canyon is the most stunning video game location I've ever seen. There's so much opportunity to use the many vehicles at hand, from low-flying the river to skydiving into the city. Quite simply, for me, the best video game map to date, and certainly the best in GTA history.  Hundreds of roof tops to explore, little hidden alley ways, hidden easter eggs around the map... Just incredible. 

 

That said, it's not perfect. A little bigger all over would have been nice, though not particularly necessary, just because I love to explore. 

  • Mastah, Osho, CarlitoDorito and 3 others like this

The7thOne
  • The7thOne

    Alter Ego

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 May 2014
  • United-States

#10

Posted 17 February 2016 - 11:54 AM

I'll give it an 8. It's certainly an extremely detailed map, and there's plenty of memorable locations. While I think Los Santos could have been a bit larger, and the desert larger as well, it's still an overall balanced map.

 

There are issues with the way certain locations are presented. The entire eastern coast of the map is almost never used, and the Alamo Sea takes away a lot of potential for a larger desert. Grand Senora almost feels too small, and compact. The highways always give you an impression of only being mere minutes away - there isn't that "isolation" feeling I'd get from playing SA or even IV.

 

Los Santos is an almost perfect rendition of real-life LA and the attention to detail with specific landmarks is incredible. As I've stated previously, the city could have been bigger and it would've benefited from it. It feels like there's a larger focus on the countryside in terms of size, and that's okay - but for a game that takes place roughly 70% in Los Santos, you'd expect it to be larger.

 

Overall it's a stunning map, but it could have been better, hence the 8.


ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#11

Posted 17 February 2016 - 12:16 PM Edited by ChiroVette, 17 February 2016 - 12:17 PM.

A 9 out of 10. Sandy Shores and Paleto Bay are amazing.

 

Same here!I knocked off the one point since they didn't include Fierro, Venturras, Red County, and Back-O-Beyond (or equivalent areas with different names)

 

Had they tried to top San Andreas's map in HD, I think it would have been the best map in the series.

  • LeonTheKiller, Osho, CarlitoDorito and 3 others like this

Whyohwhy
  • Whyohwhy

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2016
  • United-Kingdom

#12

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:01 PM

Ill give it a 9 but its still the best map in the series. For me, just the vast variety of great looking terrain to drive through in what is the best vehicle selection in any GTA makes it better than any other game world to me. Sure it could have been better but the past GTA maps have way, WAY more room for improvement than 5. 5's los Santos seems like it has all the best road layouts from the 3 main cities in SA condensed into one and its way more fun to go off road in 5, especially in first person mode.

And 5s map is beautiful in a way that none of the older maps were. Maybe one could argue that this is because its the most recent so obviously its gonna have better graphics...and I agree. At the moment GTA 5 is the best looking GTA game world and the rest look like sh*t in comparison and GTA 6 will probably make 5 look sh*tty. Looks are obviously not the only thing to consider when comparing maps but it does make it better in one aspect.

This poll is a loaded question though in that it implies that 5's map has to be a 10 to be the best map in the series and, by extension, one or more of the other gta maps are 9/10. To me, 5's map is a 9 and and the closest to it is probably SA which might just scrape an 8 and then 4 which is around a 6 or 7.
  • Fuzzknuckles likes this

shadowoperative
  • shadowoperative

    GTAO IS GOAT

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2015
  • United-States

#13

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:05 PM

It was created by an IV fan who hates V. Consider the source. I hated IVs map. Gray and brown copy and paste with no driving freedom.

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#14

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:08 PM Edited by Fuzzknuckles, 17 February 2016 - 01:10 PM.

This poll is a loaded question though in that it implies that 5's map has to be a 10 to be the best map in the series and, by extension, one or more of the other gta maps are 9/10. 

 

 

It really is loaded. It's almost as if this is designed to result in either a full sweep of people claiming San An's map is the best or IV's map is the best. 

 

For me, V's map provided me with a sense of freedom that previous maps never achieved. Particularly on foot. Walking the map end to end takes a long time but you do get that sense of being in real world locations. One of the things that helps this is the lighting, I think. The daylight feels so close to real, and I've never felt this in other games, no matter how graphically impressive they were. This was also the case on the PS3 version. Even though the PS3 was starting to show its age, the game looked fantastic and felt great to be in. The PS4 version takes this further with the extra foliage and wildlife. It's really an impressive and highly immersive map.

  • ChiroVette, Osho, CarlitoDorito and 1 other like this

Maibatsu545
  • Maibatsu545

    veritas vos liberabit

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2014
  • United-States

#15

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:12 PM

4/10 below average for the GTA series.
  • NearExpansion likes this

ChiroVette
  • ChiroVette

    Gangsta

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2003
  • None

#16

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:16 PM

 

This poll is a loaded question though in that it implies that 5's map has to be a 10 to be the best map in the series and, by extension, one or more of the other gta maps are 9/10. 

 

 

It really is loaded. It's almost as if this is designed to result in either a full sweep of people claiming San An's map is the best or IV's map is the best. 

 

For me, V's map provided me with a sense of freedom that previous maps never achieved. Particularly on foot. Walking the map end to end takes a long time but you do get that sense of being in real world locations. One of the things that helps this is the lighting, I think. The daylight feels so close to real, and I've never felt this in other games, no matter how graphically impressive they were. This was also the case on the PS3 version. Even though the PS3 was starting to show its age, the game looked fantastic and felt great to be in. The PS4 version takes this further with the extra foliage and wildlife. It's really an impressive and highly immersive map.

 

 

Totally agree. And remember that technically animals are part of the "map," too, which adds a whole new dimension to the gameplay.

 

Also, I don't think that the OP meant this to be a straight up X/10 grading system. I think 10 is meant to depict the best map of the series, not necessarily a quality of "10/10," per se. Technically it is the best map of the series, BUT I still only gave it a 9 because, to be honest, I think if San Andreas was done not on the PS2, but a true HD map, and there were animals, that would be the best map of the series.

 

Still, V's map is insanely good!

  • LeonTheKiller, Osho, CarlitoDorito and 3 others like this

CarlitoDorito
  • CarlitoDorito

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#17

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:26 PM Edited by CarlitoDorito, 17 February 2016 - 01:35 PM.

I like that if it wasn't for the internet, there's quite a few things i wouldn't know are there. Also the ocean, best game ocean I've seen, especially in a game with so much other stuff happening. The mine is really creepy, you may expect their to be something in it, even when you know there isn't. I like the little islands, waterfalls. All very nice. Theres times i just look at the game. Not something I've really done before, but some of the views, the lovely lighting, reflections, things moving and atmosphere like no game I've played yet. 

 

It seems the impressive draw distance even on last gen makes things seem smaller than they actually appear. I'd have liked a bit more of it, a bit more desert although the desert is bigger than it appears. There's an area with small sand dunes near u-tool, more of that would be good.

  • Osho and Son of Zeus like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#18

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:27 PM

One of the things that helps this is the lighting, I think.

If you get a chance to play on PC, then do try Black-Out, makes the use of lighting system for covering the LS in dark. It opens up more gameplay possibilities altogether..
  • CartmanKusanagi and Misunderstood like this

Lethal-lock
  • Lethal-lock

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2014
  • Australia

#19

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:31 PM

Minus the overkill on mountains for padding i think the map is amazing :) 


Son of Zeus
  • Son of Zeus

    Still King

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2014
  • Australia

#20

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:51 PM Edited by Son of Zeus, 17 February 2016 - 01:51 PM.

It was created by an IV fan who hates V. Consider the source.


I'm neither a IV fan nor do I hate V. You really need to stop assuming that anyone who criticises V is a IV fan.



This poll is a loaded question though in that it implies that 5's map has to be a 10 to be the best map in the series and, by extension, one or more of the other gta maps are 9/10.


No. It implies that anyone giving a full 10 obviously considers it to be the best map in the series, either tied with some othe GTA or standalone. Someone may give a 9 or 8 or 7 and still consider it to be the best in the series.
  • Algonquin Assassin, anthony, ClaudeSpeed1911 and 9 others like this

Sonny3787
  • Sonny3787

    Prankster

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Oct 2010
  • None

#21

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:51 PM

(Very good map with some minor flaws)

 

When I saw this part of the map for the first time,

 

78dJezS.jpg

 

I thought that it is a huge residential neighborhood like Lincoln Heights in L.A., but it is nothing but a dirty roads and some industrial objects. This place sucks.

 

+ Forest sucks.

 

+ Desert is too small.

 

I always wished GTA neighborhoods to be large, like real neighborhoods are, one day. Not those 'standard GTA neighborhoods' consisted of just 3-4 blocks. And finally, we have Vinewood Hills and La Puerta, they're large enough for me. Also big thanks to R* for countryside with small towns, I really love the atmosphere of a small town since GTA SA, this is what I really missed in IV.

 

SRd7Yw8.jpg

  • Mister Pink, Original Light, CartmanKusanagi and 12 others like this

CarlitoDorito
  • CarlitoDorito

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#22

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:54 PM

Despite there not being enough interiors, I love the exteriors. I'm not sure how many unique buildings there are. Hundreds definitely. Every house in the game has a different design, some with details found nowhere else in the game. Paleto bay is brimming with detail, peds having bbq's in their gardens, people sitting, drinking, dancing and using the bbq anyway, which i guess could be considered a bbq.

 

I like the easter eggs, al dente's was mentioned in IV and exists in V, eugenics too. Almost every store has its own name, many are jokes, references, some are quite clever. A small area like mirror park has more variation in design than some full games, which is madness really but also true. The little things combine for me into a big whole and there's so many little things. The layout i can live with.

  • Osho likes this

Fuzzknuckles
  • Fuzzknuckles

    Chronic Ape

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 10 Apr 2004
  • None

#23

Posted 17 February 2016 - 01:59 PM Edited by Fuzzknuckles, 17 February 2016 - 02:00 PM.

 

One of the things that helps this is the lighting, I think.

If you get a chance to play on PC, then do try Black-Out, makes the use of lighting system for covering the LS in dark. It opens up more gameplay possibilities altogether..

 

True story, I got a complimentary copy code of V for PC from R* and when I tried to enter the code, it had already been used. 

 

So I'm reluctant to pay for it when I should have got it for free! One day, however, I will probably get a copy and give the mods a try. Thanks for the recommendation!

  • Osho likes this

Misunderstood
  • Misunderstood

    Keep up, motherf*cker!

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 May 2014
  • United-States

#24

Posted 17 February 2016 - 02:04 PM

I would give the map an 8. It has some flaws but I can look past them. The countryside and city both offer beautiful spots (and because of snapmatic, I can take sexy pictures) and the weather system makes the map even sexier. There are some things that annoy me like the highway that goes in a circle and the disappointing Paleto Forest but they don't make me hate the map or even disappointed. They're just things that simply annoy me every now and then. 

  • Fuzzknuckles likes this

.Vooodu.
  • .Vooodu.

    Kekistan Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2015
  • Canada

#25

Posted 17 February 2016 - 03:21 PM

Id say its a near perfect 10.    The only reason i say near perfect is because the map lacks alot interiors.

 

 

But its still a 10.  San Andreas looks and feels as perfect.  The attention to detail is mind blowing.    I can't even bring myself to give anything lower then a 10 because nothing else compares to it.


ExTerminator
  • ExTerminator

    Heil Houser!

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2015
  • United-Nations

#26

Posted 17 February 2016 - 03:26 PM

Not being harsh, and being too kind, I'd rate the map 4/10. The map is just a let-down in every way for V... R* made such amazing maps for IV and SA, and the make this s**t the map for V. This map is pretty good for the gameplay of Online, but isn't for V. A really tiny city which is only appealing for like 10 minutes, a boring and unattractive countryside which is just copy and paste and roads everywhere; designed just for Online. San Andreas did the same San Andreas state, and that 2004 game's map is just a million times better than what V had to offer.


.Vooodu.
  • .Vooodu.

    Kekistan Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2015
  • Canada

#27

Posted 17 February 2016 - 03:33 PM

Not being harsh, and being too kind, I'd rate the map 4/10. The map is just a let-down in every way for V... R* made such amazing maps for IV and SA, and the make this s**t the map for V. This map is pretty good for the gameplay of Online, but isn't for V. A really tiny city which is only appealing for like 10 minutes, a boring and unattractive countryside which is just copy and paste and roads everywhere; designed just for Online. San Andreas did the same San Andreas state, and that 2004 game's map is just a million times better than what V had to offer.

 

 

 

You need to lay of the sh*tty drugs and uncross your eyes if you think GTA SA looks better then GTA Vs map.

 

Appealing for 10 minutes..  L   M   F  A  O!

 

I've been playing this game for 3 years... and its still appealing because it looks and feels so awesome.

 

 

I love reading bullsh*t...   I mean i loved SA but it looks like horse ass compared to GTA V.

  • Fuzzknuckles, Sonny3787, Osho and 3 others like this

ExTerminator
  • ExTerminator

    Heil Houser!

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2015
  • United-Nations

#28

Posted 17 February 2016 - 03:53 PM

 

Not being harsh, and being too kind, I'd rate the map 4/10. The map is just a let-down in every way for V... R* made such amazing maps for IV and SA, and the make this s**t the map for V. This map is pretty good for the gameplay of Online, but isn't for V. A really tiny city which is only appealing for like 10 minutes, a boring and unattractive countryside which is just copy and paste and roads everywhere; designed just for Online. San Andreas did the same San Andreas state, and that 2004 game's map is just a million times better than what V had to offer.

 

You need to lay of the sh*tty drugs and uncross your eyes if you think GTA SA looks better then GTA Vs map.

 

 

You need to lay off the sh*tty drugs and uncross your eyes if you think GTA V's map looks better than GTA SA's map.

  • dmondhaboss likes this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#29

Posted 17 February 2016 - 04:08 PM

You need to lay off the sh*tty drugs and uncross your eyes if you think GTA V's map looks better than GTA SA's map.

You should use a better term than 'looks' because when it comes to looks, its really wrong to say, SA is better than V. Nowhere this argument will make sense to anyone.
Yiu might be talking about layout, feel, structure, design...then that can be debatable.

Blackened
  • Blackened

    Fan of all GTAs

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2014
  • Scotland

#30

Posted 17 February 2016 - 04:09 PM Edited by The Six, 17 February 2016 - 04:18 PM.

Anything below a 6/10 is blatant nonsense. I don't care if you like the map or not, if you think this map is overall worse than average, you either refuse to acknowledge plus points or you are trying to have an edgy opinion.

IV and V's maps both annihilate 3D era maps in almost all respects, except perhaps character or art style. I can't take anybody seriously if they vote 5 or under, claiming 3D era maps to be better. They suck in comparison. Were they good at the time? Hell yeah. Are they still good? Hell yeah. Do they remotely compare on any fundamental level to HD maps? Absolutely not.

> from somebody who's played every game on release since 99

Edit: not to discredit anybody's opinion, but be realistic
  • Sonny3787, Osho, Stoney0503 and 2 others like this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users