Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Realistically, how large should the VI map be?

223 replies to this topic

Poll: How large should VI's map be realistically? (305 member(s) have cast votes)

How large should VI's map be realistically?

  1. Same as V (44 votes [14.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.43%

  2. Vx2 (114 votes [37.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.38%

  3. Vx3 (41 votes [13.44%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.44%

  4. Vx4 (23 votes [7.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.54%

  5. Vx5 (23 votes [7.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 7.54%

  6. Vx6 (4 votes [1.31%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.31%

  7. Vx7 (2 votes [0.66%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.66%

  8. Vx8 (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  9. Vx9 (2 votes [0.66%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.66%

  10. Vx10 or Larger (52 votes [17.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.05%

Vote Guests cannot vote
PhillBellic
  • PhillBellic

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2012
  • Australia
  • Ban Roulette Winner 2016

#31

Posted 18 August 2016 - 03:20 AM

3 times larger than V. 

 

I just want a map with a major focus on a metropolitan area of a city, and then suburbs surrounding it with some medium density industrial areas scattered around.  The remaining space can be filled with a gigantic forest (talking about real forests, not the one in V) or some marshlands or even a desert where the criminals hang out.

 

Basically a large city with it's suburbs, and some countryside for those who want it. 

So, basically a similar in style Map to V's one, but on Steroids? I wouldn't mind that.

  • GTKING1st and PwnageSoldier like this

gtafan26
  • gtafan26

    Burnt Spy

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2013
  • United-States

#32

Posted 18 August 2016 - 06:18 AM

I could probably be happy with the map size being same as V, as long as they dont waste a good part of it like with V


jpm1
  • jpm1

    Vice city citizen

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2005
  • European-Union

#33

Posted 18 August 2016 - 02:44 PM

 

I agree so much. The mountains look great in GTAV, but when you try to climb them the character ragdolls at the slightest incline and flops down unrealistically. It's maddening. Why the f*ck cant they walk up a small incline? I understand if the chacter is dunk but it happens EVERY TIME. It's so damn annoying. I've actually died at full health because the stupid character model flops over and rolls down the hill caught in a ragdoll loop until my health is gone. That is so f*cking bad! It's a total immersion killer. Also, since the player cant climb them it makes the mountains usesless wastes of space. May as well have modelled a gigantic slippery turd pile instead, thats how bad the mountains are in GTAV.

 

 

when i first came across this, i thought the same. but then when i thought about it i found this pretty realistic and cool. IRL if you climb a too steep slope, you'll fall down in most in the cases
 

  • GTKING1st and PwnageSoldier like this

Jammsbro
  • Jammsbro

    Pogo 4 life

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2014
  • Scotland

#34

Posted 18 August 2016 - 04:15 PM

Sorry, but the answer options are garbage. Why is there no option for a smaller map?

Because shut up.

  • GTKING1st likes this

(Ambient)
  • (Ambient)

    Wrath.

  • Facade Corporation
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • Poland

#35

Posted 18 August 2016 - 04:26 PM

V x2, because I want to have a decent amount of details in order to make the map feeling more alive.


Jabalous
  • Jabalous

    Villager

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • None

#36

Posted 18 August 2016 - 07:27 PM

Let me first start by saying that V showed me how a large map area that includes a countryside and only one city isn't exciting and doesn't provide the same experience of even a much smaller map, that's 2004's San Andreas. I'm not the only one here who expressed this opinion before, but others also suggested that a large map would be better if the countryside serves as a natural barrier between two different cities at least. In this way, traveling on wide highways and cutting through mountains, deserts and villages will have a purpose and it would be more meaningful than driving in a loop.

 

A large map, be it twice or triple the size of V's, is only as good as the number of cities and towns that it contains and the creative layout of the said map. I would rather have a single city with the size and density of IV's Liberty City than having a map with only one city and a plethora of countryside that leads to nowhere. Again, I like a large countryside that you can lose yourself in, but only if it's a natural barrier between two areas of different atmosphere (e.g. Los Santos and San Fierro).

  • Beastly40, Mega, GTKING1st and 3 others like this

Jammsbro
  • Jammsbro

    Pogo 4 life

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2014
  • Scotland

#37

Posted 18 August 2016 - 11:04 PM

Remember peeps, when considering V's map, that it was a map made for last gen consoles, we are well into current gen.

  • PwnageSoldier likes this

GTKING1st
  • GTKING1st

    HFLT/DMWL

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 May 2012
  • United-States

#38

Posted 18 August 2016 - 11:17 PM

(Been a while since i posted anything)either way(started typing some time after post #36)

When i started reading this, i was thinking Vx2 is just right..,

If R* by then is capable of making it just as detailed, or more than IV, as well as changing issues, and giving "life" towards areas that lacked it,(possibly, not in the way it was expected to)

 

Then started reading other comments.

Vx3. Sounded nice, but less likely.(if R* make it feel how it was with V) One reason would be that, there wouldnt be anything to head too, or a place to stay, Which would actually give a sense of no longer being in the city. Except that right now we end up looping around after a few hrs in-game time spent out of the city)

 

Vx5. Not really something i imagine to happen, but as someone put(about vehicles being accurate), if R* was able to give it a realistic feel,(and like i others said before) as well as other city's or places, or towns with more things to do or find. as well as cutting of the main dependency on going back to the city.(with places to stay all over) it might work, but it only caught my eye, cause someone mentioned Vehicle KMH.

 

which left to me to withholding my vote(for now, but what i imagine R* will most likely do. Probably Vx2, maybe 3, 5 unlikely but it'd be incredible if that happened).

i can only hope R* end up going with a slightly bigger map next time, but more detail, and life.

 

i guess what i think makes V less lively, is that we end up looping around back to the city, more of convenience of things, and there are places to stay.

Like others said, if there was other citys to travel to by plane, car, or boat. there would be a reason to. But if more places to stay, in almost every reasonable section of the map, with things to do, V probably wouldnt be given much comments than it is.

 

Offtopic: id be nice if peoples ideas where listed, so itd be easier to see why people think realisticly so and so size is reasonable.(for others who have yet to read) but that is my opinion

 

Have a wonderful day. 


ivarblaauw
  • ivarblaauw

    Howling Wolves MC President

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2012
  • Netherlands

#39

Posted 19 August 2016 - 02:49 PM Edited by ivarblaauw, 19 August 2016 - 03:12 PM.

I think 4 or 5 times larger, hear me out:

We will see more than 1 city; I think 1 huge city (2/3x the size of LS) and 2/3 minor cities the size of Los Santos. Between the cities there are all kinds of countryside, deserts, mountainranges, forests and perhaps even swamps.

Filled with a dozen or so towns and a lot of communities, the map will feel alive and real. A huge Island with tons of activities. Gone are the days of map size limit, so we will see a huge map.

The problem with V was that the city felt... to small. The urban areas were empty and all locations were too small in comparison with the large center of the city. Where do all the people live who work there? Where were the gang areas and malls? Also we missed dozens of interiors.

Another big problem with V was the countryside. A desert which was 50% airport?! Wtf. A desert should have canyons, abandoned mines, small sheds. They did a great job on Harmony and Grapeseed, and I expect more of that in the next installment.

I think that with a sizeable map of 5x larger, filled with clutter and curiosities, GTA VI will be a great success. Give players a reason to drive out of the city. More Breaking Bad, Narcos and Sons of Anarchy style missions. What happens in the countryside? Fly a shipment from one city to the other city.

No more airfields which take up half the desert area. Grapeseed has a decently sized airfield, which would have been large enough.
As stated before by others in this thread; I think the countryside should act as a natural barrier between cities. The next game should have highways, but they should lead to other cities, not circle around the map. A coastal highway is neat, I dig that, but highways are created to allow movement between cities. Small towns are connected by smaller roads, not highways (most of the time).


And to me; what I think the game really lacks; is density. Density of pedestrians and cars. Why does everything feel so empty. Where are the people. This is even worse in GTA Online (although it seems to have been mostly fixed in 1.35) Games like Assassins Creed Unity do have a couple of hundred detailed npc's (in online!) On the screen, at the same time, all doing things. Then about 50-100 peds really shouldn't be a problem in GTA. Now we are lucky to see 5 peds and 15 cars...
I live in a rural area and as I go outside in the center of town I see 20+ pedestrians and dozens of cars. In the city that number would be way higher.

- Ivar
  • Beastly40, PhillBellic, RogerWho and 1 other like this

The Deadite
  • The Deadite

    THEN I SWALLOD THE EVRYTING

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 25 Nov 2014
  • None
  • Most Improved 2016
    Crew Poster Booby Prize 2016
    Most Unwanted Medal 2016
    Doggo-Chop Winner 2016

#40

Posted 19 August 2016 - 03:56 PM Edited by Midnight Hitman, 19 August 2016 - 04:04 PM.

Sorry, but the answer options are garbage. Why is there no option for a smaller map?

Because shut up.
I'd rather have a smaller map than V for Vice City, unless they had another city like New Orleans or something but still it should be smaller than Southern San Andreas.

However, Las Venturas would be a perfect candidate for a map bigger than V. LV should be as big as LC (To be honest, LS should had been too) surrounded by a massive desert and some small buttf*ck towns there and here.
Northern side of the map there should be that snowy mountain area (forgot the real name) would be an area reminiscent to RDR's Tall Trees. South of the map the Hoover Dam leading... somewhere? Maybe a created town or the Great Canyon, who knows.

And to me; what I think the game really lacks; is density. Density of pedestrians and cars. Why does everything feel so empty. Where are the people. This is even worse in GTA Online (although it seems to have been mostly fixed in 1.35) Games like Assassins Creed Unity do have a couple of hundred detailed npc's (in online!) On the screen, at the same time, all doing things. Then about 50-100 peds really shouldn't be a problem in GTA. Now we are lucky to see 5 peds and 15 cars...
I live in a rural area and as I go outside in the center of town I see 20+ pedestrians and dozens of cars. In the city that number would be way higher.

- Ivar

Framerate.

You can't drive fast vehicles in AC, while you can in GTA. The game couldn't load thousands of peds in a big map at the speed your car moves.
  • DaWiesel, Pastry and PwnageSoldier like this

RogerWho
  • RogerWho

    "Life is... weird."

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2014
  • European-Union

#41

Posted 19 August 2016 - 05:18 PM

Does anyone know what is the size of the map in RDR? Funny, I'm quite sure it's significantly smaller than in GTA V and of course it's quite empty for the most part, but doesn't feel small. Maybe it has something to do with horse speed vs. car speed.

 

Anyway. Let's assume that both RDR and GTA IV maps are about 1/3rd of GTA V.

 

So a pretty good usage of the GTA V area would be: GTA IV-sized city on the south, RDR-sized mostly empty area in the middle and another GTA IV-sized city on the north. That sounds almost perfect to me and it doesn't even need a larger map. Although the speed of the aircraft is still kinda problematic.

 

Let's up it a notch and have a (only) 2x the GTA V area and there's enough space for 3 or 4 cities (not quite the size of LC but not small either) and still lots of woods, deserts and wilderness inbetween.

 

Or, well if R* wants those huge mountains, I guess 5x the area is needed then.

  • GTKING1st and PwnageSoldier like this

Maibatsu545
  • Maibatsu545

    veritas vos liberabit

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

#42

Posted 19 August 2016 - 07:07 PM Edited by Maibatsu545, 19 August 2016 - 07:07 PM.

I agree so much. The mountains look great in GTAV, but when you try to climb them the character ragdolls at the slightest incline and flops down unrealistically. It's maddening. Why the f*ck cant they walk up a small incline? I understand if the chacter is dunk but it happens EVERY TIME. It's so damn annoying. I've actually died at full health because the stupid character model flops over and rolls down the hill caught in a ragdoll loop until my health is gone. That is so f*cking bad! It's a total immersion killer. Also, since the player cant climb them it makes the mountains usesless wastes of space. May as well have modelled a gigantic slippery turd pile instead, thats how bad the mountains are in GTAV.

 
when i first came across this, i thought the same. but then when i thought about it i found this pretty realistic and cool. IRL if you climb a too steep slope, you'll fall down in most in the cases
I can understand if it's k2 or something. but I'm talking about very slight inclines that would be no trouble IRL. In fact, in real life, you can go down on all fours for leverage and grab rocks and branches to pull yourself up. Can't do that in V. It's not good from a fun perspective nor from a realism perspective.
  • PwnageSoldier likes this

Jezus Holy Christ
  • Jezus Holy Christ

    See You in San Fierro

  • Facade Corporation
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2014
  • None

#43

Posted 19 August 2016 - 07:18 PM

V was about 30 square miles.
I think a Vice City or San Fierro based game with ⅔ of V's map size would be great because they can go into details and it means more interiors and a more interactive city with deep layers to it.

Dutch Psycho
  • Dutch Psycho

    TETTEN! :-)

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2012
  • None

#44

Posted 19 August 2016 - 10:05 PM Edited by Dutch Psycho, 19 August 2016 - 10:07 PM.

I think 4 or 5 times larger, hear me out:

We will see more than 1 city; I think 1 huge city (2/3x the size of LS) and 2/3 minor cities the size of Los Santos. Between the cities there are all kinds of countryside, deserts, mountainranges, forests and perhaps even swamps.

Filled with a dozen or so towns and a lot of communities, the map will feel alive and real. A huge Island with tons of activities. Gone are the days of map size limit, so we will see a huge map.

The problem with V was that the city felt... to small. The urban areas were empty and all locations were too small in comparison with the large center of the city. Where do all the people live who work there? Where were the gang areas and malls? Also we missed dozens of interiors.

Another big problem with V was the countryside. A desert which was 50% airport?! Wtf. A desert should have canyons, abandoned mines, small sheds. They did a great job on Harmony and Grapeseed, and I expect more of that in the next installment.

I think that with a sizeable map of 5x larger, filled with clutter and curiosities, GTA VI will be a great success. Give players a reason to drive out of the city. More Breaking Bad, Narcos and Sons of Anarchy style missions. What happens in the countryside? Fly a shipment from one city to the other city.

No more airfields which take up half the desert area. Grapeseed has a decently sized airfield, which would have been large enough.
As stated before by others in this thread; I think the countryside should act as a natural barrier between cities. The next game should have highways, but they should lead to other cities, not circle around the map. A coastal highway is neat, I dig that, but highways are created to allow movement between cities. Small towns are connected by smaller roads, not highways (most of the time).


And to me; what I think the game really lacks; is density. Density of pedestrians and cars. Why does everything feel so empty. Where are the people. This is even worse in GTA Online (although it seems to have been mostly fixed in 1.35) Games like Assassins Creed Unity do have a couple of hundred detailed npc's (in online!) On the screen, at the same time, all doing things. Then about 50-100 peds really shouldn't be a problem in GTA. Now we are lucky to see 5 peds and 15 cars...
I live in a rural area and as I go outside in the center of town I see 20+ pedestrians and dozens of cars. In the city that number would be way higher.

- Ivar

And peope want the best graphics. I don't think this is possible with the current gen maybe with the neo and scorpio. But the biggest problem is time. It cost way too much time to make a fluent huge dense map(including top notch graphics)

I rather have the same size as V but filled with everything you mentioned.

ivarblaauw
  • ivarblaauw

    Howling Wolves MC President

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2012
  • Netherlands

#45

Posted 19 August 2016 - 10:56 PM

I am happy with the current graphics xD I dig graphics, but in the case of GTA, apart from some better textures, I think most of us actually want larger maps and denser areas than better graphics.

Because a beautiful game doesn't mean a good game. A decent looking game can be one of the best games ever. (Red Dead Redemption is a great example; graphics are old for now, but the gameplay is still top notch. Tend of thousands still play that game today)

I personally hope in a shift within the gameworld from graphics to size and density. Graphics are already lifelike, mow it is time to make the game "feel alive"
  • GTKING1st and PwnageSoldier like this

UAL
  • UAL

    Playa

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2014
  • United-Kingdom

#46

Posted 19 August 2016 - 10:57 PM

I never had an issue with the size of V's map, it was more than adequate for a GTA game IMO.

 

Where they f*cked up was how much space they designated to different regions of the map.

 

East of LS was just pointless mountains, that region should have just been Los Santos. That way East LS and South LS/The ghetto could have been a lot bigger and more Mexican/Hispanic gangs could have been implemented into the game.

 

Alimoe Sea was cool but ultimately it was a waste of map space and didn't serve a purpose. Same with Chilliad, it just took up a huge chunk of the map.

 

Ideally I'd like to see a map 30% bigger than what was in V. I'm gonna refrain from using the term "multiple cities" but I would like to see a big main city with 2 other smaller cities (cities, not towns like SS or PB).


RedDagger
  • RedDagger

    Crash test dummy

  • GTA Series Staff
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Best Ledby 2016
    Most Helpful 2016
    Quotable Notable Post of the Year 2016 ["sup"]
    Best Crew 2016 [The Daily Globe]
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2016
    Draw Contest Grand Prize 2016
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2015
    April Fools Winner 2015
    Best General Topic 2015 [GTAForums Newbie Guide 2.0]
    Helpfulness Award

#47

Posted 19 August 2016 - 11:17 PM

One point I forgot that favours a larger map is vehicle speed. Currently, vehicles are slow as molasses compared to real life or even just other vehicle-dedicated games because otherwise you could traverse the map in ridiculously small times; remember that the GTA V map is comparable to the size of Manhattan. With much larger maps vehicles can go at realistic speeds without facing this problem, especially planes - in real life planes go, well, fast, but in video games the tiny map sizes in comparison to real life mean that jets have to be slowed right down.
  • GTKING1st and gtafan26 like this

frapplatte
  • frapplatte

    Bitch, I might be

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2012
  • None

#48

Posted 20 August 2016 - 12:39 AM

If GTA had another small town the size of paleto or sandy then the map would have been fine.

 

 

1X big city

3x towns (one big)

3x small villages (chumash, grapeseed, west of map)

 

that would have been better.

  • gtafan26 likes this

Jammsbro
  • Jammsbro

    Pogo 4 life

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2014
  • Scotland

#49

Posted 20 August 2016 - 12:43 AM

People asking for a smaller map and a map with more interiors.

 

Remember, we are on 8G and the next map will be huge by comparison. Interiors will most likely be one of the main things dealt with.

 

Imagine an 8G game and the title Grand theft auto 6 and we get a game maybe 70% the size of V's San Andreas, a game that 7G handled great and filled to capacity.

 

Peeps, don't be silly. It will be larger, there is ZERO question of that.


Jezus Holy Christ
  • Jezus Holy Christ

    See You in San Fierro

  • Facade Corporation
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2014
  • None

#50

Posted 20 August 2016 - 11:08 AM Edited by Jezus Holy Christ, 20 August 2016 - 11:11 AM.

People asking for a smaller map and a map with more interiors.
 
Remember, we are on 8G and the next map will be huge by comparison. Interiors will most likely be one of the main things dealt with.
 
Imagine an 8G game and the title Grand theft auto 6 and we get a game maybe 70% the size of V's San Andreas, a game that 7G handled great and filled to capacity.
 
Peeps, don't be silly. It will be larger, there is ZERO question of that.

You forgot a point while you were having fun with calling others "silly".

The size of maps should make sense.
For example, San Fierro and Vice City (which i talked about in my former post, too) should be smaller than Los Santos, because their real-life counterparts are.
So if you want huge maps with high accuracy, you should be also expecting a new universe, which isn't really what the franchise needs.
HD universe tends to be more realistic, so having illogical map sizes f*cks it up.
A huger map is only possible if they make a whole state. For example the whole San Andreas may fulfill your wishes for a big map, but I bet it will be stupid in details.
I know 8th gen devices can run a way bigger map, but question is, can R* make a good map with that size? I think not. Maybe they can do a 3-hundred-mile wasteland for GTA Online events, but not a detailed and living city.
The biggest negative point about V is its lack of interiors, still, then y'all want a map ten times bigger? Wtf? Just because the console can handle it?!

ivarblaauw
  • ivarblaauw

    Howling Wolves MC President

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Sep 2012
  • Netherlands

#51

Posted 20 August 2016 - 03:01 PM Edited by ivarblaauw, 20 August 2016 - 03:10 PM.

While I would love to see a reboot of the series; I also don't expect we will see this.

​However, Rockstar might just change around the current GTA V map and add it into a larger island (The State of San Andreas) (which is actually already rumored to be happening in 2018!). Instead of using bridges; which would make the map quite weird; some important locations would be changed around.

However they should also add way more interiors to keep the world interesting (all restaurants, bars/nightclubs and some malls). ​I personally would love a larger Los Santos (based upon LA, San Bernardino and Orange County (Anaheim)) just to add some more residential areas, which would be neat for turfwars, it would bring back the "Alive" vibe just as Liberty City in IV had.

​Below I have added a fan made map, which would be a great indication of how a great map would look like. Suddenly the countryside doesn't look weird anymore; as it now acts like a natural barrier between different locations. (I am now speaking about the main island, as that is the original fanmap made by Gifbrah)

The upgraded fanmap added some other island, which feature cities like San Diego. Also Boats would actually have a important service (go from island A to island B). As stated earlier in this thread; ferries could appear, (inter)national airports would actually have a service and there would be enough different areas to stay fun for a decade. The map would still be way smaller than games as Just Cause 2 and 3. Certainly significantly smaller as The Crew.

here is the map I am talking about: I would already be happy with only the main island, although the other islands would make the game significantly more fun, because of the use of planes and boats.
Spoiler
  • Beastly40, GTKING1st, PhillBellic and 1 other like this

Moonwalker98
  • Moonwalker98

    Jerichoholic

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2013

#52

Posted 21 August 2016 - 09:11 AM

just more cities please 


Degrees
  • Degrees

    Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011

#53

Posted 22 August 2016 - 10:38 AM

Should be double the size of IV and V put together at least. Two large cities and small towns and country between them.
Maybe a smaller third city you can travel to by boat.

VSVP
  • VSVP

    Racist Moron

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2016
  • Unknown

#54

Posted 22 August 2016 - 10:43 AM

I honestly don't know why yall want a huge ass map, you'd probably barely use even 50% of it unless you're flying. Everytime I'm on MP i see people only in the city. I think it'd be a waste of Rockstars time tbh. GTA 5's map size was perfect.
  • The Deadite likes this

heycorcverseneborc
  • heycorcverseneborc

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2015
  • NATO

#55

Posted 22 August 2016 - 11:32 AM

It should be at least 5 times bigger than gta v . 

 

* 3 major cities ; each one of should be as the same size of the whole gta 5 map . 

 

* 10 towns , bunch of villages ,  settlements , farms , caravan parks , military areas , abondoned buildings , etc.. as the same size of the gta 5 map in total . 

 

* Wilderness ; snowy mountains , forests , swamps , canyons , caves , deserts , rivers , lakes , beaches , ocean , etc depending on which place they choose and as big as the gta 5 map in total . 

 

* Also it should contain 5* bigger parts under the surface compare to the gta 5 ; sewer system , subway line and stops , subway lines under construction , shelters with full of supplies , etc ..

 

* The climate , weather , flora , people's clothing , vehicles , etc should change on the different parts on the map . Also we should see the all 4 seasons circlings in time . We should'nt have to wait until the Christmas to see the snowy weather . 

 

 

The important things on the map are ; 

 

 

* Enterable locations / buildings ; We should able to enter the interiors of lots of buildings . Both In the story mode and online mode , except the missions too of course . I mean really lots of ...

 

* There has to be famous locations / buildings on the map for landscape and amusement depending on the cities like Disneyland , Willis Tower , White House , Pentagon , Empire State building , etc.

 

* Secret places ; We should able to discover secret sections , alleys , underground clubs , sects , gambling spots , places with full of homeless people , etc which we can't see on the map . 

 

* Transportation ; We should able to use public transportation vehicles like ; bus , train , subway , street car , ferry , boat , airplane , etc . And we should able to hitchike and get a hitchiker to our car .

 

* There has to be lots of buildings under construction on the map . They should finish and open in time . Also we should give damage/destroy the buildings and able to see some workers repair them.

  • SweetToadette01 likes this

Pink Pineapple
  • Pink Pineapple

    ________________________________________________________________

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2016
  • None

#56

Posted 22 August 2016 - 07:08 PM

The same size as V would be fine. The most important thing is having things to do and a reason to travel to different parts of the map. 

 

In V, you travel all the way up to Paleto Bay and what can you do there that you can't do in Los Santos? Nothing.


Landotel
  • Landotel

    RED DEAD 3 HYPE TRAIN

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2013
  • GoSquared

#57

Posted 25 August 2016 - 03:57 AM Edited by Raul Passos, 25 August 2016 - 04:00 AM.

2x-4x big, I feel like the concept of VC could mean that the country side like the Everglades would be huge, but I also have a feeling that Vice City would be at least slight larger than V's Los Santos simply because the power in the 8th gen consoles.  There's this feeling that whatever city they are making (most likely VC) we know that the city is included. Obviously the country side should be included, I felt really bored with IV's map, it was depressing to me that there's hardly any country side (if you want little country side in a urban location, WD even if you hate it or love it, had a decent size country side). To me 4x bigger than V is reasonable because if we do get VC as the next setting, it's most likely going to be the state of (insert parody name of Florida here), mostly a southern FL influence. This could be The Keys that could be in game. 

 

There's also room for more of an advantage of bigger city because if VC is the next setting (ex: 3x bigger), it would go from east to west, instead of south to north. V's map was weird because it put some of the most random things without it being geographically somewhat accurate. Sure Paleto Bay is accurate, but the desert is inaccurate as the desert is inspired by Imperial County which is in the east of San Diego County, not even close to LA County. Technically the deserts of Blaine County should be on the south-east, northern Blaine County should be north of LS which is accurate. If R* actually added a parody of Orange county, this would be less of an issue of the map making more reasonable sense. Despite me loving V more than IV, V's map makes me irritated on how inaccurate it is. 

 

R*'s logic! (That moment when you realize how inaccurate V's map is)

Southern_California.png

 

Could R* attempt this kind of sh*t again with map inaccuracy? Maybe, but I'll tell you why they will be more accurate and bigger. Miami as a city in general is so small, LA (in terms of land) is about 469 sq miles! On the other hand the city of Miami (in terms of land) is only about 35.68 sq mi. This would make it easier for R* to get accuracy as much as possible, that the fact they don't need to be overwhelmed with all these districts in a city. This could actually include the cities of Miami Beach, Miami Gardens, town of Bar Harbor Islands, Key Biscane, city of Sunny Isles Beach, and even a separate city such as Homestead, etc. I believe R* could have an easier time trying to make a map of Miami and could potentially add more urban life and culture into it while maintaining the countryside. 

 

Miami-Dade County:

0MRZCMw.png

 

With the power we have on current gen consoles there is no doubt that we will be getting a pretty big map, also the amount of interiors could come back too. 


Thegrandtheftmaster
  • Thegrandtheftmaster

    Bikers Unite

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 May 2016
  • United-States

#58

Posted 25 August 2016 - 04:47 AM

It should be at least 5 times bigger than gta v . 
 
* 3 major cities ; each one of should be as the same size of the whole gta 5 map . 
 
* 10 towns , bunch of villages ,  settlements , farms , caravan parks , military areas , abondoned buildings , etc.. as the same size of the gta 5 map in total . 
 
* Wilderness ; snowy mountains , forests , swamps , canyons , caves , deserts , rivers , lakes , beaches , ocean , etc depending on which place they choose and as big as the gta 5 map in total . 
 
* Also it should contain 5* bigger parts under the surface compare to the gta 5 ; sewer system , subway line and stops , subway lines under construction , shelters with full of supplies , etc ..
 
* The climate , weather , flora , people's clothing , vehicles , etc should change on the different parts on the map . Also we should see the all 4 seasons circlings in time . We should'nt have to wait until the Christmas to see the snowy weather . 
 
 
The important things on the map are ; 
 
 
* Enterable locations / buildings ; We should able to enter the interiors of lots of buildings . Both In the story mode and online mode , except the missions too of course . I mean really lots of ...
 
* There has to be famous locations / buildings on the map for landscape and amusement depending on the cities like Disneyland , Willis Tower , White House , Pentagon , Empire State building , etc.
 
* Secret places ; We should able to discover secret sections , alleys , underground clubs , sects , gambling spots , places with full of homeless people , etc which we can't see on the map . 
 
* Transportation ; We should able to use public transportation vehicles like ; bus , train , subway , street car , ferry , boat , airplane , etc . And we should able to hitchike and get a hitchiker to our car .
 
* There has to be lots of buildings under construction on the map . They should finish and open in time . Also we should give damage/destroy the buildings and able to see some workers repair them.

Why did you say Empire State Building? That was already in Gta 4 eh whatever, but yeah this would be a good idea, but I think if rockstar did 3 cities it would be difficult to get them to be accurate since there as big as the Gta 5 map. Also you can't make the cities too big, because people were complaining that the LA noire map had too much city. We should have one city ok that's all we need. In Gta San Andreas they made 3 cites, but all of them were inaccurate to their real life cities and they weren't as f*cking huge as the Gta 5 map.

Look rockstar literally can't do each city in the next Gta the same size as the Gta 5 map ok. I think the cities wouldn't be interesting, because keep in mind Los santos is the interesting parts of Los Angeles. Imagine if they put the whole Los Angeles in Gta 5. Imagine how boring some places would be ok. If they make 3 cities each the size of the Gta 5 map there wouldn't be interesting locations in the cities. You fail to understand that if they made 3 cities each the size of the Gta 5 map there wouldn't be much interesting locations.

Look I think 2 cities that are each 6 sq miles is good enough for me.

ScottleeSV
  • ScottleeSV

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2016
  • United-Kingdom

#59

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:25 AM

I think they'll try 2 cities next time (or maybe 1 city + several reasonably sized towns). They're not going to be happy just putting out something similar to GTA5. They'll want to wow people. At the same time, anything beyond 'x2' is just going infringe on the level of detail.

(You would imagine so anyway).

Queen Elizabeth II
  • Queen Elizabeth II

    ______________________

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2014
  • Poland

#60

Posted 25 August 2016 - 09:43 AM

I hope it's bigger than Vice City's map.

  • Roger Cheeto likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users