Mapping Liberty City (Laying Out Liberty City)

[White Flight]

I think it will be close to that of San Andreas. And Reiner used the word 'massive' to describe it in one of those questions...

[SI MoViE StAr]

This new Liberty City could very well be just a re-modeled version of the original one in GTA III. I don't remember once reading or hearing them say that it will be bigger than the original size. What I did hear so far is that it will be smaller than San Andreas and that doesn't really say much so how knows.

 

We've already had 4 boroughs and NJ in GTA 1 and GTA III (Portland-Brooklyn/Queens; Staunton Island-Manhattan/Bronx(?); Shoreside Vale-New Jersey). But they did add a second bridge (as prior to that in the old LC, there was never two bridges on one side) in between what looks to be Bohan & Dukes and Alderney, so things had to have change somewhat.

Edited April 26, 2007 by SI MoViE StAr

[Mute Giant]

It cant be as small as gta3 liberty city. That would suck.......... but then again, I'm drunk....

[gamefarter]

Right, but 25 was the number. Argue it, it doesn't matter. Nobody knows except Rockstar.

But where did everyone get the number? That was my question.

I believe it came out of this tread, somewhere toward the beginning.

[Chase360]

Quality+Big City=Awesome

[jerrymanu]

Guys,

 

This is my first post but I've been lurking around for a while. To be honest, I only signed up to post this link regarding the size / layout of Liberty City.

 

For what its worth, I recon the City is gonna be very impressive, both in scale and detail, but I think this link will help people realise that a realistic, accurate Liberty/New York is probably not gonna happen.

 

This is pretty awsome http://fukung.net/v/3797/New%20York%20Skyline.jpg

 

Manu

[CDT_boss]

maybe anything to do with the topic but i would like to say that Algonquin was an old Indian that lived on Manhattan also there is an Native American tribe: THE ALGONQUINS but they didn't live in New York state (Manhattan also Indian name). Many places and things in US are named Algonquin, but i think have used the name after the old Indian, just so you know it

 

PS: It's hard to find info about Algonquin from Manhattan on WWW.

[cpharding618]

maybe anything to do with the topic but i would like to say that Algonquin was an old Indian that lived on Manhattan also there is an Native American tribe: THE ALGONQUINS but they didn't live in New York state (Manhattan also Indian name). Many places and things in US are named Algonquin, but i think have used the name after the old Indian, just so you know it

 

PS: It's hard to find info about Algonquin from Manhattan on WWW.

i've said it before and i'll say it again, it is most likely named after the native american language, algonquin, from which manhattan was derived. not some hotel not some indian who lives on manhattan.

[phs1234]

maybe anything to do with the topic but i would like to say that Algonquin was an old Indian that lived on Manhattan also there is an Native American tribe: THE ALGONQUINS but they didn't live in New York state (Manhattan also Indian name). Many places and things in US are named Algonquin, but i think   have used the name after the old Indian, just so you know it

 

PS: It's hard to find info about Algonquin from Manhattan on WWW.

i've said it before and i'll say it again, it is most likely named after the native american language, algonquin, from which manhattan was derived. not some hotel not some indian who lives on manhattan.

http://www.algonquinhotel.com/

 

...one of the premier Times Square Hotels in Midtown Manhattan...

...ranked #77 of 328 hotels in New York Cityranked #77 of 328 hotels in New York City...

 

 

The hotel was sold in 2005 for a reported $74 million.

 

The Algonquin Hotel is IN Manhattan. Maybe that's why Manhattan is nicknamed Algonquin in GTA 4.

 

 

-----

 

However, the Algonquin tribe lived all along the North Atlantic coast.

 

I say its named after both.

[geomy]

 

I say its named after both.

You can't have your cake and eat it too - haven't you been here long enough to know there is only black and white. Famous hotel or Native Americans?

 

 

Actually, I assume the name of the hotel has something to do with the native tribe; so in essence, if it's named after the hotel, it is named after the Indians. Both works for me.

Edited April 26, 2007 by geomy

[phs1234]

I say its named after both.

You can't have you cake and eat it too - haven't you been here long enough to know there is only black and white. Famous hotel or Native Americans?

 

 

Actually, I assume the name of the hotel has something to do with the native tribe; so in essence, if it's named after the hotel, it is named after the Indians. Both works for me.

Yep thats probably it.

[Lioshenka]

dont know if anyone noticed this

 

[swimfreak430]

i hadent seen that

but look over his sholder you can clearly see the Crystler and Getalife building

[jimjams91]

I've edited ˸øåíüêà's picture for this.

[defibrillator]

This new Liberty City could very well be just a re-modeled version of the original one in GTA III. I don't remember once reading or hearing them say that it will be bigger than the original size. What I did hear so far is that it will be smaller than San Andreas and that doesn't really say much so how knows.

 

We've already had 4 boroughs and NJ in GTA 1 and GTA III (Portland-Brooklyn/Queens; Staunton Island-Manhattan/Bronx(?); Shoreside Vale-New Jersey). But they did add a second bridge (as prior to that in the old LC, there was never two bridges on one side) in between what looks to be Bohan & Dukes and Alderney, so things had to have change somewhat.

You are a terrible person for thinking it will be the size of GTA III. It said it wasn't going to be as large as SA not that it was going to be incredibly small. Why would rockstar ever consider making a city the same size they did a six years ago? You have a very poor rationale. San Andreas was huge and the only reason why the new Liberty City will not be as large is because there will be no desert, and here will be no country side. Do you really think that Rockstar would produce the same city from the last generation of consoles? You have very, very poor judgement.

[jimjams91]

This new Liberty City could very well be just a re-modeled version of the original one in GTA III. I don't remember once reading or hearing them say that it will be bigger than the original size. What I did hear so far is that it will be smaller than San Andreas and that doesn't really say much so how knows.

 

We've already had 4 boroughs and NJ in GTA 1 and GTA III (Portland-Brooklyn/Queens; Staunton Island-Manhattan/Bronx(?); Shoreside Vale-New Jersey). But they did add a second bridge (as prior to that in the old LC, there was never two bridges on one side) in between what looks to be Bohan & Dukes and Alderney, so things had to have change somewhat.

You are a terrible person for thinking it will be the size of GTA III. It said it wasn't going to be as large as SA not that it was going to be incredibly small. Why would rockstar ever consider making a city the same size they did a six years ago? You have a very poor rationale. San Andreas was huge and the only reason why the new Liberty City will not be as large is because there will be no desert, and here will be no country side. Do you really think that Rockstar would produce the same city from the last generation of consoles? You have very, very poor judgement.

LMAO

[CDT_boss]

Liberty city is gonna be slightly smaller than SA, San Andreas is approximately 17 square miles (44 square kilometers), almost five times as large as Vice City, and five times as large as Liberty City. Los Santos where bigger than GTAIII's LC, so think to yourself that GTAIV would be maybe all the towns and city's from SA placed together.

 

I think GTA4 will be around 35-40 SQKM and will contain more details, vehicles, more entrable buildings, more missions and features like: Houserobbing, Smuggling(new?), legitimate work?, Sports?(tracksuit) etc...

Take a look at the SA map(Ian Albert map):

P.S. The real New York with all five boroughs included New Jersey is approximately:457 km2

Area: 308.9 sq. mi. 800 km2

Area: City-368 sq. mi.(953 km2). Metropolitan area (excluding inland water)-1,148 sq. mi. (2,973 km2). Consolidated metropolitan area (excluding inland water)-10,457 sq. mi. (27,084 km2) 953 km2

New York City is made up of five boroughs: Manhattan, The Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn, and Richmond. They lie at the mouth of the Hudson River in the southeastern corner of the state of New York. Together they cover an area of about 319 square miles. 826 km2

New York City's land area covers 321 square miles, over 205,000 acres. Excluding streets and major bodies of water, almost 6.9 billion square feet of land (over 150,000 acres) are available for use. 645 km2

Kings: 71 sq. miles

New York: 23 sq. miles

Queens:109 sq. miles

Bronx: 42 sq. miles

Richmond 58 sq. miles 785 km

 

This is excluded New Jersey, it's big but i liked how NY where divided in GTA1 where they got all places on an small area, if they did the same with GTA4 and made it bigger and include the Verrazano Narrows Bridge(my favorite NY bridge) from Broker to Alderney would be cool

 

Too R*: Never make the map big and boring like WOW or Just Cause maps

Edited April 29, 2007 by CDT_boss

[geomy]

Take a look at the SA map

Hotlink disabled, check it here.

[pzuffi]

nice job guys cant wait to see what u guys come up with next

[pzuffi]

yo guys go to this web site to compare the building in gta wit real llife ones i hope this helps u guys put together the map

 

http://www.gamesradar.com/gb/ps3/game/news...033012401748021

 

 

 

 

 

[swimfreak430]

yea we already did that stuff a long time ago but this tread has gone so far off topic that nobody sees it anymore. they have identified almost every building in the Trail with its real life counterpart

[pzuffi]

o0o i gotta go back and see the map then lol.. they put together the whole map

[AleX AciD]

"Industrial area" map:

 

"Port" area:

 

"Cherkov" building area:

[AleX AciD]

I'm sorry, but all these images are not fitting in one post, so i have to double.

 

Unknown area map (must be somewhere near "Cherkov" building):

 

and it's building numbers:

 

Also notice small differences between first and second screenshots some garbage was added; doors, road surface and tree were changed.

[dertyjerzian]

Ew, I really hope those arent the final shapes for the cop/taxi cars

[HERDIST]

 

I'm sorry, but all these images are not fitting in one post, so i have to double. 

 

Unknown area map (must be somewhere near "Cherkov" building):

 

and it's building numbers:

 

Also notice small differences between first and second screenshots some garbage was added; doors, road surface and tree were changed.

 

Good work man!

[angusgs]

Well, yr explanations are very great...

 

it helps us to imagine the size of liberty city...it would be so nice and massive!!

[YukiEiri]

 

"Industrial area" map:

 

"Port" area:

 

"Cherkov" building area:

The thing we can see behind Niko is not the same bridge (Brooklyn) that is in the other images.

Why? 'cos we can't see the cables, and we see so much sky, that we should see them IF that would be the same bridge.

 

Also the Cherkov-building is not the same, look closely and you will see the difference in the billboard support structure.

 

And the building in front of it does not seem to have fire-espace in the facade side.. But that may just be because of poor image quality..

 

EDIT: Actually I think that Niko's back is towards the ElTrain track..

Edited May 10, 2007 by YukiEiri

[Paeron]

 

"Industrial area" map:

 

"Port" area:

 

"Cherkov" building area:

The thing we can see behind Niko is not the same bridge (Brooklyn) that is in the other images.

Why? 'cos we can't see the cables, and we see so much sky, that we should see them IF that would be the same bridge.

 

Also the Cherkov-building is not the same, look closely and you will see the difference in the billboard support structure.

 

And the building in front of it does not seem to have fire-espace in the facade side.. But that may just be because of poor image quality..

 

EDIT: Actually I think that Niko's back is towards the ElTrain track..

I just think it looks like they have edited out the cables in the Niko image. All the buildings are the same and its very hard to see if there are fire escapes or not in the last image. So AleX AciD is still correct IMO.

 

EDIT: As for the edited image, they had to have their text somewhere, so they just blurred the cables out. Thats what I think.

Edited May 10, 2007 by Paeron

[YukiEiri]

 

I just think it looks like they have edited out the cables in the Niko image. All the buildings are the same and its very hard to see if there are fire escapes or not in the last image. So AleX AciD is still correct IMO. 

 

EDIT: As for the edited image, they had to have their text somewhere, so they just blurred the cables out. Thats what I think.

Ok, I could believe that. BUT..

 

Notice how low the bridge is behind Niko? If you compere it to this image

 

 

You also should notice that the bridge is way higher than the houses around it.

 

So unfortunately, I have to say again that in my very humble opinion, the thingie behind Niko is the elevated rail thingie, not the (Brooklyn?) bridge.

 

EDIT: Hmm, something wrong with the pic.. Dmn.. But look at the pic where there is the train and the bridge on the background..

Edited May 10, 2007 by YukiEiri