Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Mapping Red Dead Redemption 2! Landmark Analysis Thread

1,049 replies to this topic
LibertyKing
  • LibertyKing

    I occasionally make maps.

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2011
  • Canada

#91

Posted 20 October 2016 - 10:55 PM Edited by LibertyKing, 20 October 2016 - 10:55 PM.

Soon enough there will be posts like these:

"Do you remember when we used to believe that old fake map was the real thing?"

 

Edit: Wow, what a crappy way to start the page.

  • Cameron, assCRACK_98 and AboveTheLawHD like this

Pink Pineapple
  • Pink Pineapple

    ________________________________________________________________

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2016
  • None

#92

Posted 20 October 2016 - 11:26 PM

As others have mentioned, the position of the sun means nothing. Rockstar put the sun in the northern sky in one of the screenshots for V.

 

Also, they might even change mountains. The pre-release image below caused problems for the mappers because things weren't lining up the way they should have. Now we know why.

 

wedK7wW.jpg

  • saintsrow, Duxfever, Tomasak and 12 others like this

USAPatriot
  • USAPatriot

    Media News Writer

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2010

#93

Posted 20 October 2016 - 11:34 PM

For those interested, below are the maps from the GTA V mapping thread before Rockstar released the blueprint map. I'm wondering how close we'll get to RDR2's map.

 

 

 

Makes me sad everyone always left out my maps I made... I'll stop whining now.

 

N6AFI66.jpg

S5i9E8A.jpg

 

I look forward to making maps again! :D

  • saintsrow, EVOLUT7ON, Chekoloco and 8 others like this

Dee.
  • Dee.

    GTAV= Style over substance

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2015
  • United-States

#94

Posted 20 October 2016 - 11:38 PM

Soon enough there will be posts like these:

"Do you remember when we used to believe that old fake map was the real thing?"

 

Edit: Wow, what a crappy way to start the page.

Quite the contrary.

  • StJimmy likes this

Papacu
  • Papacu

    Yo soy tu Papacu

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2016
  • None

#95

Posted 21 October 2016 - 12:16 AM

Leaked map is obvious false


Lock N' Stock
  • Lock N' Stock

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#96

Posted 21 October 2016 - 01:11 AM

The leaked map does look pretty legit, but I'm calling bullsh*t on it until confirmation. I can't help but feel like it links up with the scenery pretty closely though...

  • Dee. likes this

Mach1bud
  • Mach1bud

    Gearhead

  • GTA Series Staff
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2014
  • United-States
  • Best GTA Photographer 2016
    Coolest Member 2016
    Best Character [Snap] 2016
    Mister Los Santos 2016 Winner
    [Snapmatic Awards 2015] Best Male Character

#97

Posted 21 October 2016 - 01:49 AM

I think the leaked map is real. 

  • vnus_dmlo, Gtaman_92, StJimmy and 4 others like this

greenrock
  • greenrock

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2012
  • None

#98

Posted 21 October 2016 - 02:25 AM

So are we thinking Deep South location wise?


Nutduster
  • Nutduster

    Big Mean Jerk

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2014
  • None

#99

Posted 21 October 2016 - 02:29 AM Edited by Nutduster, 21 October 2016 - 02:43 AM.

 

The railroad is found on the 'leaked' map. Look at the key, it's a solid yellow line going across the map.

 
No one faking a map would have thought to include a railroad. It must be real.
 
P.S. Oh great, Nutduster's back. The know-it-all that hates know-it-alls. I thought you weren't coming back until the game came out. Oh well. What you mistake for know-it-all-ism is that back and forth that forces each side in the argument to really substantiate their claim to truth (in this case, the validity of the map).

 

 

What I identify as know-it-all-ism is people saying things like:

 

Beez: "In the FAKE leaked map and the cleaned up FAKE map the rail roads don't connect."

 

You: "About the only thing that would do it is if that "Worth's General Store" was mentioned BY NAME on the FAKE MAP"

 

Is it really too hard for you to just say things like, "I personally think it's fake because..." instead of acting like you know something that you obviously cannot know?  A lot of reasonably smart people who have been around the block think it MIGHT be real, nothing in the trailer proves it's fake, and we could have a nice "back and forth" here if certain folks wouldn't keep shouting FAKE MAP in all caps like God just spoke to them while they were posting.

 

And on a side note: the guy you are replying to there - other than me - wasn't saying that a railroad means the map is real.  It was a response to others' claims about there being no railroad on the map (obviously false) and that the railroad didn't connect (also false, and weirdly confusing).  In your rush to score some snark points, at least try to understand what people are talking about and why.  If someone says "The map is fake because no railroad," it's a perfectly reasonable reply to say "...but there's a railroad."  It doesn't prove anything about the map, it just disproves one argument against it.

 

For what it's worth, I have no dog in this hunt - meaning no firm opinion either way.  Just that I think the map is neither obviously real nor obviously fake (and I've seen a lot of bad fake maps over the years).  I enjoy reading people arguing back and forth, whatever their position is, as long as their arguments are sound and they're not talking down to each other.  So just play nice, that's all I'm asking.  People are excited and some of them just feel differently from you, you don't have to treat them like idiots.

  • Beez, Chekoloco, assCRACK_98 and 1 other like this

CINDOR
  • CINDOR

    the return of the outlaw

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2016
  • Argentina

#100

Posted 21 October 2016 - 02:30 AM Edited by CINDOR, 21 October 2016 - 02:31 AM.

No matter whether it is real or not, let's play a little.

Downes Ranch
tihWSj6.jpg
4yhpEjY.png

 

Leading me by this image: "Little Creek"
 

Spoiler
The shadow is the opposite side, but not if it is sunrise or sunset.
 
Perhaps in the image of "Downes Ranch" is a sunrise, and the "Little Creek" at sunset.
  • Gtaman_92 likes this

Caduceus_
  • Caduceus_

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2016
  • United-States

#101

Posted 21 October 2016 - 03:07 AM Edited by Caduceus_, 21 October 2016 - 03:55 AM.

Perhaps in the image of "Downes Ranch" is a sunrise, and the "Little Creek" at sunset.

Other way around, actually. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west.

 

And it looks like those snow-capped mountain ranges on the right side of the Downe's Ranch screenshot are going to be The Grizzlies.

 

Also I think that Little Creek is directly behind the farmhouse, not to the left of it. It seems that there simply isn't enough space for the shot to be taken south of Downe's Ranch facing north, so it has to be east of the ranch facing west.

  • CINDOR likes this

Gtaman_92
  • Gtaman_92

    Securing the bag.

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2011
  • United-States

#102

Posted 21 October 2016 - 03:10 AM Edited by Gtaman_92, 21 October 2016 - 03:10 AM.

I have a very strong feeling that the leaked map might actually be legit.

  • -Quantum-, vnus_dmlo, Original Light and 10 others like this

Caduceus_
  • Caduceus_

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2016
  • United-States

#103

Posted 21 October 2016 - 03:24 AM

My bad. I mean't the map that tacks the original RDR map on the south west corner of this one. I will get on the same page as everyone else or shut up.  :/

RDR2 is a prequel to RDR. The railroad through Blackwater wasn't even built at the time RDR2 takes place.

  • vnus_dmlo likes this

Professor SmackaDabbah
  • Professor SmackaDabbah

    Dananananananana she really loves to break

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2014
  • Australia

#104

Posted 21 October 2016 - 04:15 AM

I'm liking the more mountainous, green setting compared to Redemption's desert. Anyone else?

  • Efreet, Dee. and Robinhazo like this

Chinese Takeout
  • Chinese Takeout

    "Do, or do not. There is no try." <(-_-)>

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2013
  • United-States

#105

Posted 21 October 2016 - 04:22 AM

Here's my two cents, after seeing a load of GTA V fake maps.
And I mean a sh*t ton. Something about this map seems off. As in it seems to be the opposite from what we expect. It is unpolished, unfinished and yet still somehow seems Rockstar designed. Rockstar's maps just have a certain thing to them. That magic. 
The tip off here is the inclusion of New Elizabeth. When has Rockstar ever reused a section of map in another game (inb4 the LC in San Andreas)? The very fact that any faker with half a brain would avoid something as odd and off putting as including West Elizabeth, doubled with the rumors of a prequel, lead me to believe it is real. 
 
I'm open to debate as long as it doesn't include "It looks fake cause I say it looks fake" or if it doesn't contain "it looks fake due to the lack of Analheim".


All very good points. And I did try looking at the problem from that perspective. Who in their right mind would try to make a fake map and do something that Rockstar had never done before? Idiotic or genius. A gamble, for sure. Either it gets called out immediately, or...something else kicks in...and this is where I'm leaning right now: In the days leading up to and since the reveals that happened this week, I've been amazed at how many people I've seen that are hoping that we will be playing AS or will encounter John Marston and/or other characters from RDR1, and that they seem convinced that that would be a GOOD thing. On the one hand, it's natural to want to "re-live" all the fun you had with an old friend. But in reality, it's almost never works out, which is why successful or good sequels are such a rare occurrence. For every "Godfather Part 2" and "Empire Strikes Back," there are 100 Grease 2's and Blues Brothers 2000's and Caddyshack 2's and Batmen & Robin's. I think this is one reason why R* has wisely (for the most part) steered clear of revisiting prior stories (apart from cameos, or parodies like Undead Nightmare). One of the major problems that happens with sequels and prequels is that it CHANGES the characters that we know and love (or hate), for better or for worse...usually worse. RDR1 had what I would consider a near perfect story, with a great balance between John's desire to leave his old life and live out his days with his beloved family & the evil parties (partly a consequence of his own actions) making it impossible for him to do so...these roles divided between the government agent Ross & his old leader (father figure) Dutch. Both of these men we pure evil, and were willing to use and sacrifice anyone they could to achieve their ends. The beautiful & tragic story of John Marston concluded perfectly, and served as a poignant reminder to us to measure our choices carefully & think about the consequences of our actions. Well, speaking of consequences...there is a NECESSARY consequence to PLAYING AS or ALONGSIDE Dutch, Marston and/or any of these characters: it changes what we know about them. Ask yourself: what are the odds that ANY new storyline would IMPROVE the story of John Marston as we know and love it? The odds are infinitesimal. And yet, we still YEARN for more of what we loved, heedless of the fact that it will likely destroy what we've come to love about Star Wars- I mean, Red Dead Redemption.

 

So, going back to this map...I feel it is less of a leap to believe that NO: R* would not risk destroying their masterpiece, and YES: I think a faker would, himself, give into the "Yeah, let's go back and include some of what we all loved!" because both he and, seemingly A MILLION other RDR fans think it would be a good idea: hence this map. I feel like there's a bit of mass circular logic going on here where people are:

 

1. Assuming that any of the characters we've seen on the Monday reveal or within the trailer are John Marston or other characters from RDR1 (that's all it is...an assumption...maybe one that will end up being true, but for now only an assumption.

2. If it *is* John Marston, then it makes sense that we would revisit part of the map that is tied directly to him.

3. Therefore, since the leaked map shows part of the RDR1 map, it must be true because of #1 and #2.

 

3 supports 1 & 2; 2 supports 1 & 3; 1 supports 2 & 3...except...all 3 are still assumptions.

 

The facts (as I see them, I guess) are these:

A. No one in the poster is able to be positively identified as someone we know from RDR1

B. No one in the trailer is able to be positively identified as someone we know from RDR1

C. No location from the RDR1 map is shown in the trailer

D. No location shown in the trailer is able to be positively correlated to anything on the leaked map (i.e. if the map had "Worth's General Store" on it, I wouldn't be typing this right now)

E. Rockstar has never reused a main character from one game in a second game as the main protagonist or in any way other than a cursory nod or Easter egg or short cameo (Packie, Brucie, Niko, etc) - this one is important because it removes #1, above, which weakens #2 and #3.

 

Now, my next point. Back when Rockstar created RDR1, they created an amazing, sprawling recreation of Mexico, the American Southwest, extending north and east to the foothills of the Rockies & the beginning of the Midwestern great plains. On the way from "Texas" to the "Great Plains," and just before the Mason-Dixon line (Dixon Crossing/Mason Bridge) there was even a town that represented a swampy/bayou part of the country. There was even a rotting River Boat just up stream from that area. Given the scale of the rest of the map, this was just enough area to convey the area of New Orleans, LA, and it was situated in just the right position: between Texas and the plains.

 

Now, fast forward to the leaked map. If R* is making this great big new map, that includes a New Orleans parody (nevermind the indefensible idea that they are sharing custody of it with Hangar 13, lulz), why would they keep the "junior" version of it that lies on the other side of the "Great Plains" on the RDR1 map (Thieves' Landing)? Even if its not included, it's still "part of the canon," right? Otherwise WTF is the point of keeping any of it?? (well, the point is because it substantiates the inclusion of John Marston in the new game, which we all want, right?). But it just seems like more trouble than it's worth. If you're R* and you want to continue the story of John Marston or Dutch so badly, why don't you either A. Leave out any of the old map, so you don't have this weird repetition going on, or B. just don't make a, hahaha, "New Bordeaux." Problem solved.

 

I still haven't mentioned how "The Great Plains" in the RDR1 map gets repeated in the leaked map as "The Heartlands," both being terms for the same area of the United States; "Tall Trees" represented the beginning of the Rockies in RDR1, but now you leave those Rockies, travel up through the Great Plains, then hit NOLA again for some reason, then the Heartland again, and then back to the Rockies/Grizzlies, as you travel north and east from Mexico and Texas.

 

The problem I have with this leaked map is that it ruins the flow of R*'s version of the Frontier-era United States. It's like: either keep it the same, or start over...but don't try to jam these two together. And that's why I must conclude that this just doesn't feel like the R* way. Neither the idea of recycling characters, recycling stories, nor recycling maps.

 

There is one other possibility. It's possible that RDR2 takes place in a completely different region of the United States than RDR1, and that it contains all new crazy, lovable & despicable characters. This possibility removes all of these other story and level design problems that I've tried to illustrate. And it doesn't preclude the notion that, during our adventure in RDR2, we may bump into one or more characters that we've seen before.

 

I feel like it is this possibility that is most likely (Occam's razor), and is the main reason, when I look at the map, I think: there's no way this is Rockstar. It just doesn't have their DNA or Modus Operandi.

 

Two final statements:

 

1. In my mind, all of this is part of the fun. Pushing and pulling and challenging one another in our assumptions, all in order to achieve the shared goal of "unraveling the mystery of the map." Which is what many of us did during the 2-year leadup to GTA5's release! I don't mean to sound harsh or angry or exasperated or be a "know-it-all," or think I'm the only one that has this figured out, because I don't. But, I won't hesitate to share my ideas.

 

2. If I am wrong about all of this...it won't be the first time I was wrong, haha! And I'm man enough to admit it when I'm wrong. I like being wrong because when I am...and am corrected...it means I learned something, and became better because of it. :-)

 

Oh wait, two more final statements:

1. This map is totally fake because I say it's fake!11!!1!!!

2. I still say it's bullsh*t that Disneyland isn't on the GTA5 map!!1!11!!~!!

 

Oh shiiiii...time for bed. Peace!

 
  • Beez, chris_4130, Efreet and 9 others like this

USAPatriot
  • USAPatriot

    Media News Writer

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Jan 2010

#106

Posted 21 October 2016 - 04:24 AM Edited by USAPatriot, 21 October 2016 - 04:25 AM.

I'm liking the more mountainous, green setting compared to Redemption's desert. Anyone else?

Totally.  I've never been fond of deserts, they are not that interesting to begin with.  Dry and big.  Forests are where it's at.  Fav place was going up to Tall Tree's in RDR.  Fav place in GTA V is around Paleto Bay and Raton Canyon.  All forests.  

 

I'm thinking this location will be east-side of the Rockies.

  • Professor SmackaDabbah and CINDOR like this

Chinese Takeout
  • Chinese Takeout

    "Do, or do not. There is no try." <(-_-)>

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Aug 2013
  • United-States

#107

Posted 21 October 2016 - 04:53 AM

What I identify as know-it-all-ism is people saying things like:
 
Beez: "In the FAKE leaked map and the cleaned up FAKE map the rail roads don't connect."
 
You: "About the only thing that would do it is if that "Worth's General Store" was mentioned BY NAME on the FAKE MAP"
 
Is it really too hard for you to just say things like, "I personally think it's fake because..." instead of acting like you know something that you obviously cannot know?  A lot of reasonably smart people who have been around the block think it MIGHT be real, nothing in the trailer proves it's fake, and we could have a nice "back and forth" here if certain folks wouldn't keep shouting FAKE MAP in all caps like God just spoke to them while they were posting.
 
And on a side note: the guy you are replying to there - other than me - wasn't saying that a railroad means the map is real.  It was a response to others' claims about there being no railroad on the map (obviously false) and that the railroad didn't connect (also false, and weirdly confusing).  In your rush to score some snark points, at least try to understand what people are talking about and why.  If someone says "The map is fake because no railroad," it's a perfectly reasonable reply to say "...but there's a railroad."  It doesn't prove anything about the map, it just disproves one argument against it.
 
For what it's worth, I have no dog in this hunt - meaning no firm opinion either way.  Just that I think the map is neither obviously real nor obviously fake (and I've seen a lot of bad fake maps over the years).  I enjoy reading people arguing back and forth, whatever their position is, as long as their arguments are sound and they're not talking down to each other.  So just play nice, that's all I'm asking.  People are excited and some of them just feel differently from you, you don't have to treat them like idiots.

Okay, I think I know where we got disconnected, and it was probably my fault. I didn't really follow that whole Beez/the railroad doesn't connect thing, because I knew he was wrong about that, and he admitted it too. When I saw the comment that I responded to, I thought the guy was referring to the trailer: "Hey, there was a train in the trailer, and guess what? there's one in the leaked map, too. thus, the leaked map is legitimatized," to which I thought, "just because an (alleged) map faker places a railroad on his map of RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2, that doesn't prove he's legit, any more than if he added a horse stable." But, it looks like I clearly misinterpreted what he was saying...he was just replying to Beez. My bad there.

 

I don't really get your problem with my "Worth's General Store" comment, though. Does it not stand to reason that if when the leak hit (back in May, or something?), if it had included on the map "Worth's General Store," that would have HANDS DOWN, 100% proven that whoever made this map was LEGIT (because it's the only thing uniquely NAMED found in the Rockstar-released official trailer. However, we do NOT see that. There is nothing on the map and in the trailer that can be CONCLUSIVELY tied together (in the same way as the "Worth's" example). Doesn't that make sense?

 

As far as your suggestion that we use statements like, "I personally think...," in every writing and public speaking class I've ever taken, it was drilled into my head that it is patently incorrect to use phrases like "I think," or "I feel," because it is understood by the reader/audience that everything you are saying or writing is, in fact, your opinion. It is a waste of time and space to include these words in every sentence or paragraph or whenever you introduce a new thought or idea. I was taught that this was a universal rule of formal communication. However, as it is a sensitive subject for you (and maybe others), I will try to pepper the use of this kind of phrase within my future responses.

 

If my response to you seemed curt is was because it seemed to me that every time I read one of your responses you were berating someone, or -as you say- being a "know it all." They say that the trait you most despise in others is a trait that you yourself possess, so perhaps I need to look more closely in the mirror, as it were. I apologize if I offended you.

 

Now, let's get back to scrutinizing this fake-ass map! (just kidding!)
 

  • Nutduster likes this

Maat
  • Maat

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2016
  • Brazil

#108

Posted 21 October 2016 - 05:04 AM

I was seeing those maps made for gtav and I thought of something: I don't know if the leaked map is real but why don't you guys that are mapping try to think on the map without the leaked map in mind? just as you did with gtav map. I know it's too early to actually build anything from the ground up but it needs to start somewhere and maybe soon we can compare it to the leaked one to see if it's real.

  • Naean, Diesel311, Chekoloco and 2 others like this

ZomBearUA
  • ZomBearUA

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2012
  • Ukraine

#109

Posted 21 October 2016 - 05:12 AM

Well, yes, this is the same place

422b7b5dba.png

  • saintsrow, Efreet, Tomasak and 15 others like this

Dee.
  • Dee.

    GTAV= Style over substance

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2015
  • United-States

#110

Posted 21 October 2016 - 05:30 AM Edited by DeeDogg_, 21 October 2016 - 06:15 AM.

if anyone still has Red dead Redemption, can you go to Thieves Landing near the wreck of the serendipitous and find this house? Thanks

red-dead-redemption-2-leaked-screenshot.


Fachewachewa
  • Fachewachewa

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2013

#111

Posted 21 October 2016 - 05:32 AM

Hi everyone !

 

Aight, here's what we have so far, given that the trailer is split into 15 separate scenes, just quickly number them in order they appear:

Spoiler

Known links:
2-5
13-15
1-15

It's a start!

It's not much, but I'm pretty sure I found a link betweet 11

2sEpDlq.png

 

...and 15GDAvuE8.png

  • alz, saintsrow, Fido_le_muet and 26 others like this

Gtaman_92
  • Gtaman_92

    Securing the bag.

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2011
  • United-States

#112

Posted 21 October 2016 - 06:49 AM Edited by Gtaman_92, 21 October 2016 - 06:49 AM.

 I believe the town shown in the trailer could be the van horn trading post. Both are seemingly located at the base of a mountain.

rG1hSUd.jpg

 

 

 

1OqT9KH.jpg

  • saintsrow, 2281, Metalz and 1 other like this

saintsrow
  • saintsrow

    Dime store angel of death

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Sep 2006
  • None
  • Best Work Writer's Discussion 2016 [The "I Love Karen Daniels" fanfic]
    Best Story/Poem 2015 [The "I Love Karen Daniels" fanfic]

#113

Posted 21 October 2016 - 07:00 AM

This thread is a great idea.  One of the most fun threads in the run-up to GTAV was the mapping thread.  

 

But I don't think we're gonna find any of these RDR2 places on Google Street View ...  :p


Farmer and the rocks:

 

But this is the same webpage background picture that Rockstar has had for years, even before GTAV came out. 

  • Chekoloco, 2281, Chinese Takeout and 1 other like this

alz
  • alz

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2004

#114

Posted 21 October 2016 - 07:01 AM

Fun thread!

 

Good matching to the western area with the squirrelly river.  And good match with the mountain a couple posts above.   "Worths General Store" is just a spoof on the real "Woolworths General Store"

 

It's very common to have Designer maps that look like crap in game production which is why I lean towards this being a legit map.  Over production it probably changed here and there... like making a lazy river turn into a snaking river like in the trailer.

 

San Diego Rockstar made RDR differently than GTA.  The success of RDR arguably made GTA V a better experience.  So there's no reason to say RDR2 isn't part of the larger Red Dead world with connections to the previous game.

 

On a side note... I'm sad they decided to called it Red Dead Redemption 2 instead of Red Dead Rsomething.  It makes Red Dead Revolver an orphan in the series.  I understand why for Marketing though... Red Dead Redemption is now a global brand.

 

Food for thought... the reason there's been no Singleplayer GTA V content... because R* North is helping San Diego wrap RDR2.

  • StJimmy and Thugazi like this

alz
  • alz

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2004

#115

Posted 21 October 2016 - 07:09 AM Edited by alz, 21 October 2016 - 07:11 AM.

For what it's worth... the Rage engine land chunks match up with the leaked map, the original Red Dead map extracted by someone years ago and this other map of GTA 5.

 

87zBLNZ.jpg

  • Tomasak and StJimmy like this

Efreet
  • Efreet

    I will keep you in black, on your behalf

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • None

#116

Posted 21 October 2016 - 07:10 AM Edited by Jabalous, 21 October 2016 - 07:13 AM.


D. No location shown in the trailer is able to be positively correlated to anything on the leaked map (i.e. if the map had "Worth's General Store" on it, I wouldn't be typing this right now)

 

You've very good arguments against the map, Chinese Takeout, but I don't think that this is a good one. I don't expect to see stores or bars marked by their names on the map and it will probably follow the tradition of Redemption's map which only had naming convention like Doctor's Office, General Store (Worth's General Store is one), Gunsmith store and so on, all of which had icons on the map to pinpoint their locations similar to the tradition that GTA started. Even so and this time stores will be called by their names on the map, and assuming it's real, then the art might be from an earlier version that's still being updated, modified and added to.


Fido_le_muet
  • Fido_le_muet

    XDBX

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 Mar 2007
  • France
  • GTAF Time Trials New Year Champion 2017
    GTAF Time Trials Champion 2016
    GTAF Time Trials Spring Champion 2016
    Contribution Award [Mapping Los Santos]

#117

Posted 21 October 2016 - 07:28 AM Edited by Fido_le_muet, 21 October 2016 - 07:28 AM.

It's not much, but I'm pretty sure I found a link betweet 11
2sEpDlq.png
 
...and 15GDAvuE8.png

I agree with you. Well done
http://imgur.com/AfXRcb6
  • vnus_dmlo, MichaelTn21, Fachewachewa and 1 other like this

TwistedMedia
  • TwistedMedia

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Mar 2008
  • None

#118

Posted 21 October 2016 - 09:29 AM

Is it me or did the trailer re-use the same very select few locations - it seems that most of the shots taken are linked together/can be used as a reference point. Perhaps they purposely only used a small part of the map because they saw how successfully members of this forum mapped GTA V  :lol: 

 

Of course it is a lot harder to map this kind of game as there are far less tall buildings and distinctive landmarks.

 

One thing I did notice - look at the man in front of the fire, and then look at the scene in the town, there's a building in the background which has clearly been on fire the night before

  • 2281, Distrom, StJimmy and 2 others like this

Djeli
  • Djeli

    Crappy Sponsorship

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2014
  • France

#119

Posted 21 October 2016 - 10:04 AM Edited by Djeli, 21 October 2016 - 10:10 AM.

Hi everyone !

It's not much, but I'm pretty sure I found a link betweet 11

Spoiler

 

I add a green line to your pics to help on the direction between this two places.

 

5207132sEpDlq.jpg

 

761623GDAvuE8.jpg

 

From 11 to 15 they clearly move to the left side in the sun direction.

 

That's a bad drawing but we can see where they go and where they come from

 

8261182sEpDlq222.jpg

  • ewankirky, EVOLUT7ON, RedDagger and 5 others like this

InfernoV
  • InfernoV

    Dont you just hate keyboard warriors!

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 May 2012

#120

Posted 21 October 2016 - 10:54 AM

I think there will be a desert in this game, people on here acting like the whole map was shown in the first trailer.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users