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
ScottleeSV
  • ScottleeSV

    Player Hater

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

#61

Posted 25 August 2016 - 10:26 AM

I think you can safely stake everything you own on it being larger than Vice City's map.

heycorcverseneborc
  • heycorcverseneborc

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2015
  • NATO

#62

Posted 25 August 2016 - 11:11 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.

 

 

Empire State Building is just an example . I mean they should create world-known buildings / locations like that , and definetely we should be able to enter / explore every square feet of these buildings or locations . They designed gta 5 to ps 3 / xbox 360 mainly . The capacity of these consoles are limited . Because of that the gta 5 map was not big enough . They'll release the gta next in ps 4 , xbox 2 , plus ps 5 and xbox 2 . So the capacity of ps 4 and xbox 2 is more than enough to create 5* bigger map than gta 5 . I'm sure sony and microsoft are going to release lots of new updates to these platforms  until gta next come out . No need to mention that they made an incredible profit from gta 5 and they can recruit hundreds of new people , make investments to their hardwares and softwares to be able to make the map at least 5* bigger size . 

 

Check out the map size's of Witcher 3 Wild Hunt , Just Cause 3 , The Crew , No Man's Sky , Minecraft , etc now . When do you think gta next come out 2020 , 2021 ? It's pretty much doable . 


Thegrandtheftmaster
  • Thegrandtheftmaster

    Bikers Unite

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

#63

Posted 25 August 2016 - 05:48 PM

 

 

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.

 

 

Empire State Building is just an example . I mean they should create world-known buildings / locations like that , and definetely we should be able to enter / explore every square feet of these buildings or locations . They designed gta 5 to ps 3 / xbox 360 mainly . The capacity of these consoles are limited . Because of that the gta 5 map was not big enough . They'll release the gta next in ps 4 , xbox 2 , plus ps 5 and xbox 2 . So the capacity of ps 4 and xbox 2 is more than enough to create 5* bigger map than gta 5 . I'm sure sony and microsoft are going to release lots of new updates to these platforms  until gta next come out . No need to mention that they made an incredible profit from gta 5 and they can recruit hundreds of new people , make investments to their hardwares and softwares to be able to make the map at least 5* bigger size . 

 

Check out the map size's of Witcher 3 Wild Hunt , Just Cause 3 , The Crew , No Man's Sky , Minecraft , etc now . When do you think gta next come out 2020 , 2021 ? It's pretty much doable . 

 

I never said anything about console limitations you literally missed the point about what I said.


heycorcverseneborc
  • heycorcverseneborc

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2015
  • NATO

#64

Posted 26 August 2016 - 10:33 AM Edited by heycorcverseneborc, 26 August 2016 - 10:34 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.

 

 

Empire State Building is just an example . I mean they should create world-known buildings / locations like that , and definetely we should be able to enter / explore every square feet of these buildings or locations . They designed gta 5 to ps 3 / xbox 360 mainly . The capacity of these consoles are limited . Because of that the gta 5 map was not big enough . They'll release the gta next in ps 4 , xbox 2 , plus ps 5 and xbox 2 . So the capacity of ps 4 and xbox 2 is more than enough to create 5* bigger map than gta 5 . I'm sure sony and microsoft are going to release lots of new updates to these platforms  until gta next come out . No need to mention that they made an incredible profit from gta 5 and they can recruit hundreds of new people , make investments to their hardwares and softwares to be able to make the map at least 5* bigger size . 

 

Check out the map size's of Witcher 3 Wild Hunt , Just Cause 3 , The Crew , No Man's Sky , Minecraft , etc now . When do you think gta next come out 2020 , 2021 ? It's pretty much doable . 

 

I never said anything about console limitations you literally missed the point about what I said.

 

 

Why the Rockstar can't do it then ? They have time , money , sources , know-how ,  experienced and qualified employees , etc ... they've everything to create a much more bigger and functional map than gta 5 .


Thegrandtheftmaster
  • Thegrandtheftmaster

    Bikers Unite

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

#65

Posted 26 August 2016 - 02:29 PM

Spoiler

Well its, because the city would be too big. People were complaining that the LA norie map was too big and that map was all city. Also consider the fact that LA norie map was smaller then the whole gta 5 map. Look if Los santos was the whole gta 5 map the  city wouldn't be as interesting as it is. The reason they only did los santos in gta 5 wasn't because last gen couldn't handle it was, because rockstar wanted to recreate Los angeles properly this time.

 

Trust me if gta 5 was the whole los angeles it really wouldn't be as interesting. Making 3 cities that the each the size of the gta 5 map isn't exactly gonna be interesting ok. Liberty city without water is the size of los santos and liberty city felt like the right size in gta 4.  The reason the gta 5 los santos feels small too you is, because the render distance is high and your radar. Look if your on pc in gta 5 turn off your radar and turn your render distance to low and you'll see what I'm talking about. For example with the cities thing look at The crew map when you go to los angeles in that game its not very interesting too explore.

 

Look trust me if 3 cities each the size of the gta 5 map was in gta 6 none of those cities would be that interesting. Look we should have one huge city ok. This map should be big enough for gta 6 (keep in mind the scale of this map is smaller then the gta 5 map so this concept map is bigger then the gta 5 map)

vice-city-hd-remake.jpg?resize=845%2C752

If we have a city as big as the gta 5 map people will complain the city is boring. While I agree gta 5 los santos was missing 3 locations from gta san andreas los santos which were east beach (long beach), Glen park (Mcarther park) and unity station (Union station). But anyways the gta 5 map should have just had more places like mirror park.

 

Look what I'm trying to tell you is that 3 cities the size of the gta 5 map is too big. Rockstar can't fit enough interesting locations in the city if it was that big. The cities would be boring, because the cities are too big lacking interesting locations. An example of the cities being too big in games and not interesting are La norie and The crew in los angeles those cities in those games weren't interesting. Those cities in those games were so boring driving around there was nothing interesting.

 

Well I hope I told you the reason why this 3 city thing wouldn' work  :lol:. Another thing is don't make the cops like gta 5  :miranda:

  • Perez84 and Scaglietti like this

reform
  • reform

    Beaten, battered, bruised, Told to get down

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2009

#66

Posted 27 August 2016 - 11:40 AM

I'd like to see something 1.75 - 2.5 x the size of V's map, but at the same time feature way more enterable building interiors and underground subway/sewer/cave systems etc.

 

And I'm fine with many interiors being duplicates (with randomly generated accessories) like many of the houses & fast food places in SA.

 

I also think that not having a giant ring-road around the entire map, and not always having a road of some description only a few hunderd meters from anywhere you are on the map, would make it feel a lot bigger.


gunziness
  • gunziness

    Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2010
  • Argentina

#67

Posted 27 August 2016 - 03:57 PM

I wouldnt mind if the map is the same size as V's as long as its better designed and used (I.E. not having excessive ammount of mountains that takes most of the space, and a bigger and more balanced city design).
  • The Deadite likes this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#68

Posted 27 August 2016 - 07:35 PM Edited by Official General, 28 August 2016 - 01:37 PM.

It's not more so the size that concerns me, but what's actually on the map, the amount of interiors, more interaction, and lots of different interesting, fun things to see and do. I just hope they don't waste the map like they did with V, if they make another big map.
  • Beastly40, PhillBellic, ClaudeSpeed1911 and 4 others like this

MiamiViceCity
  • MiamiViceCity

    The Unforgiven

  • 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

#69

Posted 28 August 2016 - 09:13 AM

I've never really understood the fascination with unnecessarily large maps. JC2 had an enormous map, but it was boring and tedious to explore IMO.

Much like other open world games that try to push the bigger = better agenda.

As for the GTA series GTA V's size is as big as I would like to see it. I'm hoping for a more urban centric map this time around though. Not interested in miles of wilderness with nothing to do.
  • Official General, Beastly40, ClaudeSpeed1911 and 3 others like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#70

Posted 28 August 2016 - 09:55 AM

Same as V. Its size is enough. All R* needs to focus on the content matching its size. Like more interiors, interactions, and plenty of other stuff in the game world.
  • Official General, Roger Cheeto and Pepe Silvia like this

RogerWho
  • RogerWho

    "Life is... weird."

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

#71

Posted 28 August 2016 - 12:23 PM

I've never really understood the fascination with unnecessarily large maps. JC2 had an enormous map, but it was boring and tedious to explore IMO.

As many people here stated, it's not about the size per se. It's about what you want to fit in it and that it should feel large. If you want a realistic-feeling city (at least a large US city), then it should have a large industrial area, substantial suburbs and all that. A drive from the richest area to the poorest should take more than 20 seconds or at least give you a feel that you drove trough the entire city. If the map is supposed to have big-ass mountains, then the whole map needs to be larger to accommodate for that. In essence: more variety = needs a larger map.

 

The other side of the story is that what's being discussed here are just 2 extremes: relatively small, often dense maps like in GTA and its clones which you can breeze through in 2 minutes on a fast car, and huge empty continents like in JC, The Crew, Fuel or Skyrim which can take hours to traverse (with their respective travel speeds).

 

Can there be a reasonable middle-ground maybe? Like to have decent quality but also in enough quantity that it makes sense to get a plane and fly somewhere instead of just driving a bike.

  • MiamiViceCity, Official General, Beastly40 and 3 others like this

Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#72

Posted 28 August 2016 - 01:48 PM

I've never really understood the fascination with unnecessarily large maps. JC2 had an enormous map, but it was boring and tedious to explore IMO.
Much like other open world games that try to push the bigger = better agenda.
As for the GTA series GTA V's size is as big as I would like to see it. I'm hoping for a more urban centric map this time around though. Not interested in miles of wilderness with nothing to do.


Exactly this.

It's all very well and good making these detailed, beautiful looking, huge-sized maps, but at the end of the day if there is not much good stuff to do or interact with, it quickly becomes a pointless, boring, and tedious experience. Look at Vice City for instance. VC had the smallest GTA map ever, but yet to me it's world felt a lot larger than it looked when I played it, simply because it had so much good stuff in its map that made it feel that way - there were plenty of amazing interiors to interact with and explore, lots of different activities and side quests, there was always crazy sh*t and serious violence kicking off in the streets, it all just felt like one big massive playground. And yet it was even much smaller in map size than its predecessor, GTA III.

I'm totally with you on the urban centric approach to the next GTA's map. I'd very much take more cities and towns with a lot of interactivity this time, rather than vast expanses of natural habitat and countryside with nothing to do.
  • MiamiViceCity, Beastly40, ClaudeSpeed1911 and 1 other like this

Jabalous
  • Jabalous

    Villager

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • None

#73

Posted 28 August 2016 - 02:20 PM Edited by Jabalous, 28 August 2016 - 02:23 PM.

Great points in this topic. I might also add that, from my perspective, I would rather have a map that takes place in a city with no countryside similar to IV. After V, I came to a conclusion that Grand Theft Auto can't do a countryside map justice, so it would be better to leave it for a wilderness-centric game like Red Dead.


Official General
  • Official General

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

  • Members
  • Joined: 13 Apr 2010
  • None

#74

Posted 28 August 2016 - 03:58 PM

Great points in this topic. I might also add that, from my perspective, I would rather have a map that takes place in a city with no countryside similar to IV. After V, I came to a conclusion that Grand Theft Auto can't do a countryside map justice, so it would be better to leave it for a wilderness-centric game like Red Dead.


I don't mind countryside and wilderness in GTA as it provides a very nice, drastic change of scenery that greatly adds to the game's variety. It's always a good feeling to explore one very different environment to another in the same in-game world - SA demonstrated this brilliantly. I loved travelling through the country to get to San Fierro and Las Venturas. My main problem with V is that natural habitats and countryside just took up far too much of the map, when GTA for most part had always had a city and urban environment as the center of events and activities. For me the ideal GTA map is one big city, with either one or two smaller cities, and small towns and settlements dotted across the map, with only 30 percent of the map wilderness and countryside, separating cities and towns. Basically something like SA.

IV didn't need countryside in my opinion as it was centered on the NYC/NJ metro area which has very little expanses of countryside. I'd have liked more suburban towns in Alderney though.
  • MiamiViceCity, Beastly40, ClaudeSpeed1911 and 4 others like this

Osho
  • Osho

    High Roller

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2012
  • None

#75

Posted 28 August 2016 - 04:30 PM

I might also add that, from my perspective, I would rather have a map that takes place in a city with no countryside similar to IV. After V, I came to a conclusion that Grand Theft Auto can't do a countryside map justice, so it would be better to leave it for a wilderness-centric game like Red Dead.

Playing IV one can even conclude that GTA can't do a city map justice either.
I mean, its not like IVs city map really offered a great content to match its size which was even smaller than GTA SA map, while the latter featured three cities and a countryside plus desert with tons to do in them.
Its about balance in anything you design keeping in mind that mere graphics and details alone don't make people enjoy any game but there's to be interesting "gameplay" and "content" as well, otherwise what's the point of travelling across a city or any area, if you can't interact or engage in something that makes you spend hours without getting bored pretty soon?
Just to drool over the microscopic details on every building in 4K resolution?
No, right?
  • Official General and Pastry like this

Thegrandtheftmaster
  • Thegrandtheftmaster

    Bikers Unite

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

#76

Posted 28 August 2016 - 04:38 PM

I've never really understood the fascination with unnecessarily large maps. JC2 had an enormous map, but it was boring and tedious to explore IMO.
Much like other open world games that try to push the bigger = better agenda.
As for the GTA series GTA V's size is as big as I would like to see it. I'm hoping for a more urban centric map this time around though. Not interested in miles of wilderness with nothing to do.


Exactly this.
It's all very well and good making these detailed, beautiful looking, huge-sized maps, but at the end of the day if there is not much good stuff to do or interact with, it quickly becomes a pointless, boring, and tedious experience. Look at Vice City for instance. VC had the smallest GTA map ever, but yet to me it's world felt a lot larger than it looked when I played it, simply because it had so much good stuff in its map that made it feel that way - there were plenty of amazing interiors to interact with and explore, lots of different activities and side quests, there was always crazy sh*t and serious violence kicking off in the streets, it all just felt like one big massive playground. And yet it was even much smaller in map size than its predecessor, GTA III.
I'm totally with you on the urban centric approach to the next GTA's map. I'd very much take more cities and towns with a lot of interactivity this time, rather than vast expanses of natural habitat and countryside with nothing to do.
Your right about this I agree with you. I saw some people complaining about that Los santos was smaller then the la noire map. I don't know why they were complaining, because in la norie there really is not much to do after your done with the story. People were complaining that the city in la norie was too big. La norie is a bigger map then Los santos, but la norie Los Angeles is only recreating certain parts on Hollywood and downtown Los Angeles. Unlike the Gta 5 Los santos is recreating Los Angeles in a compressed version and the interesting parts of Los Angeles. I really don't know why people were complaining about the la norie map bigger then loss santos. What's the point of having a huge map when you can barely interact with the city ? La norie was set in the 1950's it was suppose to be a replica of la in the 1950's.

I don't know why people are bringing up the crew map is bigger then Gta 5. In the crew it's a dead game and also there is little interaction and interesting parts of the city in that game. Guys why are you comparing an open world game to a racing game ? Obviously the racing game will barely have any interaction with the map. Look guys can you stop saying these non open world games are bigger then Gta 5 please ? If your gonna say a map is bigger then Gta 5 on this thread make sure it's also an open world game, because the games your saying have a bigger map then Gta 5 right now there is little interaction with the actual map.
  • Official General likes this

JosephStalin
  • JosephStalin

    Death is the solution to all problems. No man - no problem.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2016
  • Russia

#77

Posted 28 August 2016 - 06:50 PM Edited by JosephStalin, 28 August 2016 - 07:05 PM.

I've never really understood the fascination with unnecessarily large maps. JC2 had an enormous map, but it was boring and tedious to explore IMO.

Much like other open world games that try to push the bigger = better agenda.

As for the GTA series GTA V's size is as big as I would like to see it. I'm hoping for a more urban centric map this time around though. Not interested in miles of wilderness with nothing to do.

 

Agreed, a massive game world is OK but when it's lifeless & there's nothing to do in it or see the size becomes irrelevant and even a little bit of a hindrance. 

 

OT 

 

I don't mind, really as long as the location is atmospheric detailed & interesting to explore, then the size of the map doesn't matter all that much in my opinion.

  • MiamiViceCity and Official General like this

Zodape
  • Zodape

    CABINETS

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2013
  • Argentina

#78

Posted 30 August 2016 - 02:46 AM

As long as the map is packed and has varied enviroments that make sense, size doesn't matter. Of course it should have a considerable size, but being bigger than V's is not a must.
  • Official General likes this

JumpingKentFlash
  • JumpingKentFlash

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2004
  • Denmark

#79

Posted 30 August 2016 - 03:42 PM

The absolute right way to go is to have those cities in the compressed Rockstar way. The game gets better and more interesting if it's made like that. That said, I'd still love a huge map. Yes, with a large place in between too. When Rockstar makes maps, it always ends up on the a tad too small scale. Don't get me wrong, I love all their maps except for VC, but I'd just like to see them do something like San Fierro in the north and Las Venturas in the south, with a big mountain range in between them. They could add a big desert to the south of the mountain range and a forest area to the north of it. I don't recall how Vegas and SF are in the real world..... the way they're placed on a real world map I mean. Isn't it SF to the north with the bay and Vegas to the south east of it? Bottom line: A very large map with a big city on either end. I know people say that a desert takes up a lot of space, but it'd just be nice to have with nothing in there. Of course there should be the odd rock formation and such. I'd love the feeling of driving from the one big city to the next, and it takes a lot of time.


pisku
  • pisku

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2016
  • Mexico

#80

Posted 30 August 2016 - 06:42 PM

10 times larger of what the entire GTA5 map was, put all the cities from previous GTA games (Liberty City, Vice city, Los Santos, San fierro, Las Venturas) in a compressed USA map, add, desert, sand, sea some small towns, in the border add a mexican city, more wilderness a mexican beach city and in the south a colombian city and a couple southamerican cities, then in the middle the atlantic ocean a small scale europe with london, a small european city state, a mediterranean arabic city and a russian style city and end with a couple of asian cities Japan and China with a small city based in those from thailand or Cambodia.

 

+ More cities so you have more gangs, missions, you could fly from one city to another, play online, form a gang or be part of one.

+ More vehicules, cars from Eastern Europe, Asia, exotic places, more planes, music, girls, etc.

+ More clothes, tatoos, customization

+ deep story (mexican drug traffiking, southamerican drug traffiking, amazonian forrest lords, evangelic lunatics, southamerican crime, gangs, dictators, eastern europe prostitution, european money laundering, asian gangs, drifting, etc.


GTA6oclock
  • GTA6oclock

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2014
  • United-States

#81

Posted 30 August 2016 - 08:25 PM

10 times larger of what the entire GTA5 map was, put all the cities from previous GTA games (Liberty City, Vice city, Los Santos, San fierro, Las Venturas) in a compressed USA map, add, desert, sand, sea some small towns, in the border add a mexican city, more wilderness a mexican beach city and in the south a colombian city and a couple southamerican cities, then in the middle the atlantic ocean a small scale europe with london, a small european city state, a mediterranean arabic city and a russian style city and end with a couple of asian cities Japan and China with a small city based in those from thailand or Cambodia.

 

+ More cities so you have more gangs, missions, you could fly from one city to another, play online, form a gang or be part of one.

+ More vehicules, cars from Eastern Europe, Asia, exotic places, more planes, music, girls, etc.

+ More clothes, tatoos, customization

+ deep story (mexican drug traffiking, southamerican drug traffiking, amazonian forrest lords, evangelic lunatics, southamerican crime, gangs, dictators, eastern europe prostitution, european money laundering, asian gangs, drifting, etc.

As nice as this would be, it's not a realistic expectation. A map of that scale with graphical fidelity and detail surpassing V would probably take a decade to make, if not more.

  • The Deadite likes this

heycorcverseneborc
  • heycorcverseneborc

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Feb 2015
  • NATO

#82

Posted 31 August 2016 - 09:30 AM

Spoiler

Well its, because the city would be too big. People were complaining that the LA norie map was too big and that map was all city. Also consider the fact that LA norie map was smaller then the whole gta 5 map. Look if Los santos was the whole gta 5 map the  city wouldn't be as interesting as it is. The reason they only did los santos in gta 5 wasn't because last gen couldn't handle it was, because rockstar wanted to recreate Los angeles properly this time.

 

Trust me if gta 5 was the whole los angeles it really wouldn't be as interesting. Making 3 cities that the each the size of the gta 5 map isn't exactly gonna be interesting ok. Liberty city without water is the size of los santos and liberty city felt like the right size in gta 4.  The reason the gta 5 los santos feels small too you is, because the render distance is high and your radar. Look if your on pc in gta 5 turn off your radar and turn your render distance to low and you'll see what I'm talking about. For example with the cities thing look at The crew map when you go to los angeles in that game its not very interesting too explore.

 

Look trust me if 3 cities each the size of the gta 5 map was in gta 6 none of those cities would be that interesting. Look we should have one huge city ok. This map should be big enough for gta 6 (keep in mind the scale of this map is smaller then the gta 5 map so this concept map is bigger then the gta 5 map)

vice-city-hd-remake.jpg?resize=845%2C752

If we have a city as big as the gta 5 map people will complain the city is boring. While I agree gta 5 los santos was missing 3 locations from gta san andreas los santos which were east beach (long beach), Glen park (Mcarther park) and unity station (Union station). But anyways the gta 5 map should have just had more places like mirror park.

 

Look what I'm trying to tell you is that 3 cities the size of the gta 5 map is too big. Rockstar can't fit enough interesting locations in the city if it was that big. The cities would be boring, because the cities are too big lacking interesting locations. An example of the cities being too big in games and not interesting are La norie and The crew in los angeles those cities in those games weren't interesting. Those cities in those games were so boring driving around there was nothing interesting.

 

Well I hope I told you the reason why this 3 city thing wouldn' work  :lol:. Another thing is don't make the cops like gta 5  :miranda:

 

I disagree with you . Check the results of the poll . 112 people voted so far . Only 19 of them ( %17 ) think like you , they would ilke to have same map size as gta 5 . However 93 people ( %83 ) think like me , they would like to see much bigger map than gta 5 . An open world game like gta vi , which is going to be released later than 2020 , should have be much bigger map size than gta 5. 

 

You said ' it would be too big , we spend hours to go from somewhere to somewhere ' . That's why they should design a transportation system in detail . We should be able use vehicles like bus , train , more functional subway , cable car ,  airplane , ferry , boat , hitchike , etc to reach our destination quickly if we want . Of course it should be in realistic way . Like able to choose and pay your seat from an ticket office or online , eat / drink sth during the trip , buy / ask sth in the vehicles , enjoy the view , chat with other passengers , go to the toilet , able to move freely in the train , ferry , airplane , etc .. 

 

Another thing is they should create this map with lots of landmarks , points of interests and enterable builidngs / locations to be interesting and attractive . Both on surface and under surface . 

 

 

* 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 ..

 

* 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 .

 

* 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.

 

In gta v we were allowed to do only limited things at Del Perro Pier , Vespucci beach , Senora Desert , Chillad mountain etc .. They should have designed a crowded and a fully accessible funfair / amusement park like pacific park and disneyland that you can ride every vehicles / play every games , spend hours with your friends or alone without boring in it , a crowded beach that you can able to tan , picnic , bonfie parties , do lots of sports like beach volley , flyboarding , windsurfing , waterskiing , water polo , etc .. An isolated , scorching desert wih cactuses , snakes .. when your car is broken you have to walk to pass it without water or food , have secret buildings like area 51 in san andreas , etc...a snowy mountain that you can hike , throw parties , relax in tubs , do lots of sports like skiing , snowboarding , ice skating , ski jumping , race with snowmobiles , etc ..  

 

If they design a map like what i mentioned it would make gta vi the best-selling game ever . 

  • Official General likes this

Thegrandtheftmaster
  • Thegrandtheftmaster

    Bikers Unite

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

#83

Posted 31 August 2016 - 12:05 PM Edited by Thegrandtheftmaster, 31 August 2016 - 12:10 PM.

 

Spoiler

Well its, because the city would be too big. People were complaining that the LA norie map was too big and that map was all city. Also consider the fact that LA norie map was smaller then the whole gta 5 map. Look if Los santos was the whole gta 5 map the  city wouldn't be as interesting as it is. The reason they only did los santos in gta 5 wasn't because last gen couldn't handle it was, because rockstar wanted to recreate Los angeles properly this time.

 

Trust me if gta 5 was the whole los angeles it really wouldn't be as interesting. Making 3 cities that the each the size of the gta 5 map isn't exactly gonna be interesting ok. Liberty city without water is the size of los santos and liberty city felt like the right size in gta 4.  The reason the gta 5 los santos feels small too you is, because the render distance is high and your radar. Look if your on pc in gta 5 turn off your radar and turn your render distance to low and you'll see what I'm talking about. For example with the cities thing look at The crew map when you go to los angeles in that game its not very interesting too explore.

 

Look trust me if 3 cities each the size of the gta 5 map was in gta 6 none of those cities would be that interesting. Look we should have one huge city ok. This map should be big enough for gta 6 (keep in mind the scale of this map is smaller then the gta 5 map so this concept map is bigger then the gta 5 map)

vice-city-hd-remake.jpg?resize=845%2C752

If we have a city as big as the gta 5 map people will complain the city is boring. While I agree gta 5 los santos was missing 3 locations from gta san andreas los santos which were east beach (long beach), Glen park (Mcarther park) and unity station (Union station). But anyways the gta 5 map should have just had more places like mirror park.

 

Look what I'm trying to tell you is that 3 cities the size of the gta 5 map is too big. Rockstar can't fit enough interesting locations in the city if it was that big. The cities would be boring, because the cities are too big lacking interesting locations. An example of the cities being too big in games and not interesting are La norie and The crew in los angeles those cities in those games weren't interesting. Those cities in those games were so boring driving around there was nothing interesting.

 

Well I hope I told you the reason why this 3 city thing wouldn' work  :lol:. Another thing is don't make the cops like gta 5  :miranda:

 

I disagree with you . Check the results of the poll . 112 people voted so far . Only 19 of them ( %17 ) think like you , they would ilke to have same map size as gta 5 . However 93 people ( %83 ) think like me , they would like to see much bigger map than gta 5 . An open world game like gta vi , which is going to be released later than 2020 , should have be much bigger map size than gta 5. 

 

You said ' it would be too big , we spend hours to go from somewhere to somewhere ' . That's why they should design a transportation system in detail . We should be able use vehicles like bus , train , more functional subway , cable car ,  airplane , ferry , boat , hitchike , etc to reach our destination quickly if we want . Of course it should be in realistic way . Like able to choose and pay your seat from an ticket office or online , eat / drink sth during the trip , buy / ask sth in the vehicles , enjoy the view , chat with other passengers , go to the toilet , able to move freely in the train , ferry , airplane , etc .. 

 

Another thing is they should create this map with lots of landmarks , points of interests and enterable builidngs / locations to be interesting and attractive . Both on surface and under surface . 

 

 

* 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 ..

 

* 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 .

 

* 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.

 

In gta v we were allowed to do only limited things at Del Perro Pier , Vespucci beach , Senora Desert , Chillad mountain etc .. They should have designed a crowded and a fully accessible funfair / amusement park like pacific park and disneyland that you can ride every vehicles / play every games , spend hours with your friends or alone without boring in it , a crowded beach that you can able to tan , picnic , bonfie parties , do lots of sports like beach volley , flyboarding , windsurfing , waterskiing , water polo , etc .. An isolated , scorching desert wih cactuses , snakes .. when your car is broken you have to walk to pass it without water or food , have secret buildings like area 51 in san andreas , etc...a snowy mountain that you can hike , throw parties , relax in tubs , do lots of sports like skiing , snowboarding , ice skating , ski jumping , race with snowmobiles , etc ..  

 

If they design a map like what i mentioned it would make gta vi the best-selling game ever . 

 

I never even said that I want a map as big as the gta 5 map. I said that your idea isn't good, because the cities would be boring, because if  the city is really big there wouldn't be as many interesting locations. Dude the cities wouldn't be interesting, because it wouldn't have enough interesting locations and the city is too boring. Look try going to another game that is set in los angeles and see if the city is as interesting as gta 5 los angeles.


RogerWho
  • RogerWho

    "Life is... weird."

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

#84

Posted 31 August 2016 - 02:28 PM Edited by RogerWho, 31 August 2016 - 02:37 PM.

I said that your idea isn't good, because the cities would be boring, because if  the city is really big there wouldn't be as many interesting locations. Dude the cities wouldn't be interesting, because it wouldn't have enough interesting locations and the city is too boring.

Arguments aren't your strong suit man.

 

The general mistake people do when assuming the future of the map size is that they only compare the extremes: small dense maps like GTA and such vs. huge empty maps of The Crew or whatnot.

 

Well, there certainly has to be some reasonable middle ground. I think that's what R* was aiming for with GTA V but they probably hit the limits of the X360 DVDs and minimum storage (4GB) so it didn't work out at the end. Although why they've spend so much resources on the sea bed is beyond me.

 

My take is that the next game should have multiple cities. SA made it work just great, even GTA IV feels like the islands are different cities (Alderney is, after all). They don't need to be huge, just distinct enough and far enough from each other to make the travel worthwhile.

 

LS feels small because everything is too close. A drive from Vinewood to the poor districts takes what, 20 seconds? And then a lot of districts are quite useless. Even if the industrial area with the docks were expanded into a standalone city, there would be more reason to stay and explore there instead of instantly moving to the center because that's where all the action is.

  • Official General, Beastly40, GTKING1st and 1 other like this

Scaglietti
  • Scaglietti

    Italia

  • Facade Corporation
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2013
  • Italy
  • Best Poster [Vehicles] 2016

#85

Posted 31 August 2016 - 08:56 PM

I've never really understood the fascination with unnecessarily large maps. JC2 had an enormous map, but it was boring and tedious to explore IMO.
Much like other open world games that try to push the bigger = better agenda.
As for the GTA series GTA V's size is as big as I would like to see it. I'm hoping for a more urban centric map this time around though. Not interested in miles of wilderness with nothing to do.

Because if we got a map twice the size of V I'm sure it would be just as, if not more detailed than V and in that case, more is better. I also drive 90% of the time
The more miles, the further I can drive, the better. One of my biggest problems with driving in GTA is eventually you crave more tarmac and new scenery. I just want to get on the highway and cruise to a far location for about ten minutes no interruptions or detours.

Also that feeling of being so far from the metro, the bigger the map, the greater that feeling. Of course as I've stressed in the past, the layout matters too.

Thegrandtheftmaster
  • Thegrandtheftmaster

    Bikers Unite

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

#86

Posted 31 August 2016 - 09:12 PM

I said that your idea isn't good, because the cities would be boring, because if  the city is really big there wouldn't be as many interesting locations. Dude the cities wouldn't be interesting, because it wouldn't have enough interesting locations and the city is too boring.

Arguments aren't your strong suit man.
 
The general mistake people do when assuming the future of the map size is that they only compare the extremes: small dense maps like GTA and such vs. huge empty maps of The Crew or whatnot.
 
Well, there certainly has to be some reasonable middle ground. I think that's what R* was aiming for with GTA V but they probably hit the limits of the X360 DVDs and minimum storage (4GB) so it didn't work out at the end. Although why they've spend so much resources on the sea bed is beyond me.
 
My take is that the next game should have multiple cities. SA made it work just great, even GTA IV feels like the islands are different cities (Alderney is, after all). They don't need to be huge, just distinct enough and far enough from each other to make the travel worthwhile.
 
LS feels small because everything is too close. A drive from Vinewood to the poor districts takes what, 20 seconds? And then a lot of districts are quite useless. Even if the industrial area with the docks were expanded into a standalone city, there would be more reason to stay and explore there instead of instantly moving to the center because that's where all the action is.
I never said we can't have multiple cities. Look the HD era is suppose to be more accurate then the 3D era. Gta San Andreas had 3 cities yet they weren't accurate. Your misunderstanding what I said ok. Liberty city + Alderney both have skyscrapers. The reason rockstar could capture Liberty city + Alderney accurately is, because rockstar offices are in New York. I never said we can't have multiple cities I just said we shouldn't have them too big. You keep on twisting my words here.

wrote
  • wrote

    We did it! GTA IV 2017

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Mar 2014
  • None

#87

Posted 01 September 2016 - 09:22 PM

I'm sure it will be outstanding. Bigger projects are something Rockstar has always been fond of.

MrPeteyMax
  • MrPeteyMax

    Later, losers.

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Sep 2013
  • United-Kingdom

#88

Posted 01 September 2016 - 10:21 PM

Quality, not Quantity.

 

If R* decide to focus on size we're royally f*cked. They should focus on making what they have more alive. GTA V was a step up, the areas felt amazing, full of great detail and little things that really helped with the 'immersion' of the land. If they just focus on size it might not have that same feeling. A lot of big maps in games have a "copy and paste" quality which would really suck in a GTA game.

 

It could be the size of Vice City, but if it felt more alive than V managed? I'd be fine with it.


Thegrandtheftmaster
  • Thegrandtheftmaster

    Bikers Unite

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

#89

Posted 01 September 2016 - 10:57 PM

Quality, not Quantity.

This is true. However I think the vice city map was too small though, especially considering rockstar have to fit countryside and city in a gta vice city sized map. I think the map should be twice as big as gta 5 thats good enough. However I still agree with what you said "quality over quantity."

 

Anyways let me explain my idea for the map. We should have one main city, because they can focus on one city. However multiple cities isn't a bad idea, however if they had one city they could focus on it more. So one main city and then surrounding countryside would be nice. There should be an airport in the city and in the countryside somewhere so its easier to travel. There should be 5 towns and also there should be more abandon locations in the countryside then in gta 5. I think las vegas would be perfect for gta 6 on terms of they way it could work. For you guys who want it set in liberty city you should be happy, because here is what there is in las vegas. I know it sounds silly, but hey its the closest thing you got to liberty city in gta 6  :lol:

new_york_new_york_hotel_casino_las_vegas

 

. But seriously though they could have the city in a circle with surrounding countryside. Since its in Nevada luckily area 69 is in there so we get a huge military base too. Well hey anyways this is probably the best thing for gta 6 (twice the size as gta 5's map. Las Vegas with surrounding desert. AREA 69. 5 towns/villages in the countryside.) New York New York in Las Vegas would be the closest thing to New York in Nevada.

 

 

 

For my second choice it could be 3 times larger then the gta 5 map. I don't have a concept map for the other idea ok. Alright. (This concept map isn't mine btw) anyways here is the map.

(Keep in mind the scale is a lot smaller then the gta 5 map.) Also I can't really explain where everything is in this map, because I can't resize the photo without losing quality.

 

vice-city-hd-remake.jpg?resize=845%2C752


Smoov_Operator
  • Smoov_Operator

    Special place in hell for me and it's called a throne.

  • Members
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2016
  • United-States

#90

Posted 02 September 2016 - 08:38 AM Edited by Smoov_Operator, 02 September 2016 - 08:39 AM.

GTA 6 - Europe 1944.

  • Roger Cheeto likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users