Jump to content

» «

Do you want to see another island map?

19 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you want to see another island map or one set on the mainland? (50 member(s) have cast votes)

What Say You?

  1. Island Map. Because it's tradition, dammit. (33 votes [66.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 66.00%

  2. Set on the mainland. We need to be part of this brave new world. (17 votes [34.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 34.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote
Edward Nashton
  • Edward Nashton

    Bread Makes You Fat?!

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2015
  • United-States


Posted 03 August 2017 - 10:26 AM Edited by Edward Nashton, 03 August 2017 - 11:56 AM.

If I recall correctly, every GTA map so far has been set on an island. The reasoning for this, I'd imagine, was to avoid using invisible walls and preserving the player's immersion - in later games like SA and IV, you could even drive a boat or fly over the ocean indefinitely. This stopped in V, once you approach the map's limit, your vehicle breaks down into the sea and then you're eaten by sharks. So now that R* has broken that trend of not using artificial barriers on the map, would you still want to see the next map set on an island? 


I wouldn't, it's pointless now. They might as well set it on the mainland and do the same thing they did in V - for example, if the next game is set in Las Venturas, have it so that your car breaks down once you begin to reach the end of the map, and when you get out and continue to walk in the desert, you're ripped apart by a roaming pack of coyotes. Or Something like that. There's also the possibility of using procedurally generated terrain, but that's a tall order. I just want to get a sense that the map is actually connected to the rest of the world, and not this self contained Twilight Zone pocket dimension that floats on an endless ocean. 

  • confederatestatesgta, ClaudX and DimitriFaustin like this

  • ~Tiger~

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2014
  • None
  • Most Missed GTA Member 2017
    Best Ledby 2015
    Best Ledby 2014
    Helpfulness Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [GTA V]
    Contribution Award [Snapmatic Competition]


Posted 03 August 2017 - 11:39 AM

I just want to get a sense that the map is actually connected to the rest of the world

It's certainly do-able. Far Cry 4 is set in a land-locked country which just happens to be surrounded by unscalable terrain. The sandbox is contained nicely with no clumsy 'turn back' warnings to break the immersion.

For this reason I would like to see GTA Next with a mainland location map.

  • Edward Nashton likes this

  • Tycek

    Being a bastard works.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2009
  • Poland


Posted 03 August 2017 - 11:48 AM

Maps in 2D era GTAs weren't islands and Shoreside Vale from GTA III and LCS is located on mainland at least in theory.


I wouldn't mind seeing new map in the game to be part of the mainland if the boundaries are made well. Whether these will be mountains or procedurally generated terrain it doesn't matter for me as long we got interesting map to play on.


And to be honest I wouldn't mind seeing exclusion of the flying vehicles for the sake of map immersion. We didn't have them in GTA III, Saints Row, Watch Dogs and many other games that in the end were really great to play.

  • Edward Nashton and DimitriFaustin like this

JF Prodigy
  • JF Prodigy

    A dance with the Devil might last you forever.

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2017
  • United-States


Posted 03 August 2017 - 07:04 PM

I'm down for either, as long as they don't put too much time on making the sea so expansive.  

  • Watain

    Ridin' motorcycles and makin' mayhem in GTA since 1998.

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2015
  • Sweden
  • Next DLC Thread Page 4000 Winner


Posted 03 August 2017 - 07:42 PM

I don't really mind, but I guess it's convenient having the map being a lonely island. That way you can go around by boat and have access to the shores everywhere.

  • Mister Pink, MojoGamer and DimitriFaustin like this

  • DimitriFaustin


  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Mar 2016
  • United-States


Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:37 AM

To be honest, I wouldn't mind if the setting was either surrounded by water or part of a mainland. Red Dead Redemption and the Mafia games are also great examples of settings that are part of

a mainland with water in certain places (and there's no flyable vehicles in the Mafia games, either). I vote for both.

Mister Pink
  • Mister Pink

    Siamese Dream

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 Nov 2004
  • None
  • Best Poster in Music 2017
    Best Poster [Music] 2016
    Best Poster [Music] 2015
    Best Poster [Music] 2014
    Most Knowledgeable [Music] 2013
    Best Contributor [Music] 2012


Posted 04 August 2017 - 02:43 PM Edited by Mister Pink, 04 August 2017 - 02:48 PM.

I like the island model although V really stood out like an actual island to me. San Andreas didn't feel like an island to me, maybe it was the 3 cities or sprawling countryside and varied terrain, I could easily forget it was an island. 


Part of me thinks I would enjoy something like RDR but then I often wonder what flying would be like with such a map. I wouldn't be inclined to scrap flying (fun and realism) for the sake of map realism. I think the trade-off of it being on an island is perfectly good video-game logic to fulfill a feature that offers more fun, value and gameplay than say, having the odd existential thought about it being an island. If the map is designed well, most vistas should give you an impression you are on a mainland and not necessarily on an island. 


If they lock it off like RDR, they'll have to do an exceptional job of it because what would be immersion breaking is invisible walls, ledges that are normally climbable, non-climbable etc.


The island model might be unrealistic in the sense that the place it's representing isn't really an island. However most locations GTA is based on are by the sea so at least one half of the map is real, it's the just the other side where the land should keep going that's at odds. However, the landlocked model also forces you to suspend your disbelief in that you can't drive or go here or there. At least with the island model, it doesn't restrict you in things you can't do. If you want to over that mountain or building you, you can. If you want to see the other side, you can. That player freedom to me is more valuable that coming to terms that you are on an island. 


The thing is, too, islands do exist, but locking off map trickery doesn't exist in real life. What I mean by that is if I see a mountain, I can climb it. If I come across a tricky-rockface that  stops me from climbing over it, I can at least get a helicopter and fly over it. I'm never going to come across an invisible wall or some physics defying block to stop me doing so.


Making creative ways like being attacked by bears or coyotes or whatever is nice but after a few times wouldn't it just be so unrealistic  that every time you want to leave a place or go beyond a certain point you get killed. The island model doesn't ask that of you. It's just an island and they exist except all they ask you do is believe that it's LA or New York which they do quite convincingly. 


 When we used to play Road Rash as kids, I would think about how it would be cool to go to places we can see in the map. But the game doesn't let you. You're restricted the road and a few metres either side of the road. When GTA III came about it was like wow. Almost anywhere I see, I can go!


The landlocked map in Skyrim is perfect and it's great in Watch Dogs too. Skyrim isn't a vehicular game, obviously so traversing is done a lot of horseback and on foot. I find a lot of Watch Dogs action focuses on non-vehicular action, although vehicles are main thing used to get around. 


I just think GTA's exciting use of Airports, flying, flying missions, versatility of missions including flying should remain so. I don't think it should regress to removal of such big features and having those big features greatly benefits an island map. 

  • Algonquin Assassin, Efreet, universetwisters and 7 others like this

  • confederatestatesgta

    garou the badass hero hunter from one punch man.

  • Members
  • Joined: 31 May 2013
  • United-States


Posted 04 August 2017 - 04:54 PM



And to be honest I wouldn't mind seeing exclusion of the flying vehicles for the sake of map immersion. We didn't have them in GTA III, Saints Row, Watch Dogs and many other games that in the end were really great to play.



i have to disagree. because flying is one of the best parts of gta in my opinion. do you remember how upset people were because there was no flyable planes in gta 4? sure there were helicopters and they were nice. but people loved flying planes in gta sa. even vice city had the dodo. flying in gta 5 is one of my favorite things to do. sure some open world games dont have them. and if they worked out good then fine. but there is a big community of aircraft lovers in gta. if they took them out it would ruin the game for me. 


anyways back on topic. i think the island in gta 5 is fine. honestly im too busy racing or getting in gunfights to care about the endless ocean. it dosent bother me. the map is already big. although i still wish we could normally go to north yankton.

  • Tycek

    Being a bastard works.

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2009
  • Poland


Posted 07 August 2017 - 07:17 AM Edited by Tycek, 07 August 2017 - 09:12 AM.

I don't care as much about the planes as you do, and the San Andreas was one of the worst games you could fly the plane in. The low visibility with high pop-up rate, especially in case of the trees appearing right before your nose didn't make flying pleasant experience for me and during all my playthroughs of SA I've never done in more than game wanted me to. I much more preferred to grab a car and drive through the map than flying above it. 


Surely Vice City got a plane (called Skimmer BTW) and it was something that was just right for me. For the planes to work properly you need a really big map as even V one was too small, which resulted in laughable velocity of the flying vehicles.


Planes won't save mediocre game and good one will defend itself even without a possibility to fly.


And map could be either encircled with unpassable mountains or with procedurally generated land as I've said before, which would allow inclusion of planes and create immersion that we don't playing on the lonely island located in the middle of the ocean.

  • Algonquin Assassin likes this

  • CGFforLife

    GTA V: Huge improvement over snore (GTA IV)

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2017
  • Indonesia


Posted 14 August 2017 - 10:56 AM

Just keep it as island. It gonna need a lot of effort to make the map in the mainland, and I'm pretty sure there gonna be a complain that the map feel too small and they doesn't need to lock the map. It actually make the map feels so small if they make it as mainland, where island map actually feels big and much more xomplete

And beside if R* make the map as a mainland, there gonna be a clickbaiter youtuber who "show" us how to pass the barrier to unreachable part :p

  • .Emmi

    Foot Soldier

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 May 2014
  • Austria


Posted 18 August 2017 - 09:24 AM Edited by .Emmi, 18 August 2017 - 09:25 AM.

GTA set in mainland rather than an island could work though ... just let us fly over the borders and suddenly the planes', helicopters' engine stops working and you crash in this part of map which is restricted ... sure R* would have to fully model a small part of it, including peds and cars, ... but it would greatly add to the immersion. One part can be surrounded by sea, the other by mainland where when you enter it, your car will break down, your plane, you'll be shot by gangstas or the police, animals attack you, ... There is dozens of ideas to prevent/stop the player going deeper into this area. It would be great.

  • ViceOfLiberty


  • Joined: 18 Aug 2017
  • United-States


Posted 18 August 2017 - 02:23 PM Edited by ViceOfLiberty, 18 August 2017 - 02:34 PM.

I think it could go either way. One way to do it would be instead of using water to the horizon they could make it mountainous. You could have a freeway that is blocked off at some end point so that you can't go past it, yet it offers the feeling of something existing beyond it. This poses a problem with aircraft though, unless you just get auto shot down with an RPG when you cross the line. 

Really, GTA V is the first game it being an island really bummed me out and I think it's because the barrier seemed very artificial. A 3-island map has a better feel than the 1 island because since there are very large bridges over water, the water doesn't stick out as much. You don't notice the water as a barrier when you have the ability to travel over large portions of it via bridges. 

Algonquin Assassin
  • Algonquin Assassin

    We're all looking for that special someone

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2007
  • Australia
  • Best Moderator 2017
    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


Posted 19 August 2017 - 05:50 AM

I think Island maps feel more natural. I hate invisible walls/barriers in games. In games like RDR landlocked maps work best, but in a GTA game I'd hate to be restricted to the physical area.

Maybe island maps aren't the most realistic, but I don't see to fix what isn't broken.
  • Mister Pink, eCola and The Deadite like this

Pink Pineapple
  • Pink Pineapple


  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Feb 2016
  • None


Posted 19 August 2017 - 03:10 PM

It depends on the location. I think Vice City should be an island. For Las Venturas, I'd prefer endless desert and you hit a dense sandstorm when you go too far out.

  • theGTAking101 likes this

  • Charlottes

    911SC girl

  • Members
  • Joined: 16 Nov 2014
  • Canada


Posted 20 August 2017 - 02:58 PM

I guess a mainland map would make sense if we couldn't use planes or anything but...we can, there's probably going to keep on being planes and helicopters in this game

  • mariana_dm1989


  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2013


Posted 25 August 2017 - 06:25 AM

It's always been islands with every GTA game.It's like we are playing in the universe of United Islands of America. But i dont mind. There probably is no better alternative.

  • Gokuzbu

    Luis and Niko will not be touched by Trevor.

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Jun 2012
  • United-Kingdom


Posted 26 August 2017 - 12:14 PM

I have never seen the map being surrounded by water as a negative thing. Being forced back or unable to fly higher than a mountain would be corny and videogamey.

  • ViceOfLiberty likes this

Trooper Fera
  • Trooper Fera

    Are you late to the abortion clinic?

  • Members
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2017
  • United-States


Posted 01 September 2017 - 03:33 AM

Island, because unreachable areas kill the immersion on a whole new level. It doesn't feel as complete when you have a mainland, because you can never access all of it. 

  • Efreet

    Wake up and smell the coffee

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2007
  • None


Posted 01 September 2017 - 06:36 AM Edited by Jabalous, 01 September 2017 - 06:44 AM.

I've been interested in a procedurally generated land solution since before the announcement of GTA V. It could be technologically feasible, but it mightn't serve the artistic point of view better than the current island solution. 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it' nicely explains why Rockstar hasn't tried to depart from what has long been established since GTA 3 when it comes to the map being an island. It's all about the illusion and making a good layout of the map to trick the player's mind into thinking that he/she is playing in a large connected world, which is a thing that worked for me, from III, San Andreas to V. 

The Paradox
  • The Paradox

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2017
  • Turkey


Posted 03 September 2017 - 02:41 PM

One island thing was great in older gta's but not 5. If they do more islands why not?

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users