Jonny04 Posted January 26, 2008 Author Share Posted January 26, 2008 Decided to boot up SA and do a little test, and that was grab a ordinary speedboat down at the SF docks under the bridge that takes trains over. the bay bridge or something i believe its called. Anyway The results were interesting. Red line is approximate path I took. As you can see I start backed up againist the SF airport runway and went full speed around to the first check, about half of San Fierro's city limits, and that was only 1 minute, I thought this is promising so I continued at full speed around the full island. The results was me almost reaching the runway again at the 5 minute mark. It may not be considered a fair test, but I am assuming that have of Alderney/ Algoquin etc is gonna be around the size of SF plus the country south of it. Althorugh probably more rectangular, seen as Manhattan is pretty much like that. Its also fair to point out I lost time doing the tight turns in the river that leads back to the airport , just west of Los Santos. Lock it, discuss it, flame me, i don't care but im pretty happy with the results. And from what kikizo says it's a decent size, the 5 minutes in the speedboat reconfirms this for me. Excuse bad grammar, spelling etc in a rush here. why did you try and go as fast as possible? this is obviously not what R* was doing in the preview. it took them 5 mins to get around half of the borough because they were sightseeing, not racing. Dunno if Its just me but I feel I justified why I did this test, it was to see how far I'd get in 5 minutes in top speed, suggesting the size of the map if indeed Kikizo were shown the tour at full speed. To be honest why would they stop ? So as I say again the justification is there- how far you get in 5 minutesd around a part of SA to compare to Kikizo's journey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic_Al Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Liberty City is smaller than San Andreas. Keeping speed the same, however long it takes to go all the way around San Andreas, it must take less than 1/4 that time to go across Liberty City (like from north to south) in a straight line. The Rockstar quote on San Andreas' size is here. If you want to know how big Liberty City is you have to work down from that number. Compared to New York City, Liberty City is a small town. It's a huge game and I'm not taking anything away from that but it's going to be a couple miles wide and feel like about a quarter-million people, not 8 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlitement Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Liberty City is smaller than San Andreas. Keeping speed the same, however long it takes to go all the way around San Andreas, it must take less than 1/4 that time to go across Liberty City (like from north to south) in a straight line. The Rockstar quote on San Andreas' size is here. If you want to know how big Liberty City is you have to work down from that number. I'm not sure I really understood what you said.. This is NOT the old Liberty City. Kikizo already said it takes 5 mins to go north-south, and in SA it takes 2 min. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny04 Posted January 26, 2008 Author Share Posted January 26, 2008 (edited) Not doubting it, but if it is 75% or whatever the size is then its gonna be 27 million square meters. It could be distrubted largewly to Manhattan/ NJ. The rest being in the bronx, queens etc. Those three areas are about the same length altogether from top to bottom, as the Manhattan island is. So what you could say is Manhattan takes about 9 milliom sq meters, NJ takes 9 million, the Bronx, Queens and Brooklyn share the other 9 millions sq meters. This is all approximate due to the Kikizo map they provided, its also speculation using the numbers provided. Tbh it is all speculation but the original topic was a very simple test, there is no reason to doubt that Manhattan is as big as my test area, because theres still alot more map left to distribute. Lol probs made no sense to anyone this post. Lets all think if the numbers 75% as quoted by Rockstar and 27 million sq metes approx. Its a large playground for all city I reckon. I seem happy. I mean so much of that crappy 36 million of SA was devoted to green textures with trees all over them. GTAIV is described as being populated, densely with buildings, roads etc just like the city itself. I'm excited with the 27 million we've been pretty much told about by quotes from R*. Edited January 26, 2008 by Jonny04 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic_Al Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 I'm not sure I really understood what you said.. This is NOT the old Liberty City. Kikizo already said it takes 5 mins to go north-south, and in SA it takes 2 min. Liberty City in GTA4 is known to be smaller than San Andreas, because there is much more stuff in GTA4 and San Andreas has a lot of empty space. Since this thread is about distance I'm trying to help give some numbers to keep it realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny04 Posted January 26, 2008 Author Share Posted January 26, 2008 I'm not sure I really understood what you said.. This is NOT the old Liberty City. Kikizo already said it takes 5 mins to go north-south, and in SA it takes 2 min. Liberty City in GTA4 is known to be smaller than San Andreas, because there is much more stuff in GTA4 and San Andreas has a lot of empty space. Since this thread is about distance I'm trying to help give some numbers to keep it realistic. Yup it is i agree. Like you said 75% of 36 is 27, so I am pretty happy with 27 million sq meters of city. It is gonna rock anyway when has R* ever disappointed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nlitement Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 If it takes more time to get from point A to B in another dimension, it is larger. It takes more time to get from point A to B in LC. Therefore, it is larger than SA. I'm lost. What are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny04 Posted January 26, 2008 Author Share Posted January 26, 2008 I'm lost. What are you talking about? You talking to me when you say that? If so i'm merely replying to ps360 who present the numbers and I replied to his post., Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic_Al Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 If it takes more time to get from point A to B in another dimension, it is larger. It takes more time to get from point A to B in LC. Therefore, it is larger than SA. I'm lost. What are you talking about? The May 2007 Game Informer preview confirmed GTA4's Liberty City is a "smaller geographical mass" than San Andreas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny04 Posted January 26, 2008 Author Share Posted January 26, 2008 If it takes more time to get from point A to B in another dimension, it is larger. It takes more time to get from point A to B in LC. Therefore, it is larger than SA. I'm lost. What are you talking about? The May 2007 Game Informer preview confirmed GTA4's Liberty City is a "smaller geographical mass" than San Andreas. However it does not mean Algoquin is not as large as the test suggests, it merely suggest overall all 5 boroughs together aren't as large as SA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonx Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 I would like to swim in a boat around the whole GTA4 map... and count time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kallaN Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 I would like to swim in a boat around the whole GTA4 map... and count time Swim in a boat? Hehe that would be nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIXAXIS Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Nice find. Never thought of doing it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny04 Posted January 26, 2008 Author Share Posted January 26, 2008 lol i cba with the old gta's atm but thot why not try it anyway,i might boot up gta3 or VC and do a comparison lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmmfloorpie Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 This is pretty neat, but I think there is a flaw in your logic... All the previews I've read said that it took 5 minutes to go around Algonquin... Remember that there are other 'buroughs' around Algonquin... So to go around All of the boroughs like you went around San Fierro etc might even take longer than the 5 minutes it took just to circumnavigate Algonquin alone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carbine23 Posted January 27, 2008 Share Posted January 27, 2008 I got the same result. Also, dude, it took 5 minutes to do THIS: http://www.abload.de/img/lc08mapcd6.jpg And not AROUND Alderney.. but from North to South, you know. Which means that it's EVEN BIGGER than YOU thought! No dude, you got it all wrong It took 5 minutes to get through half of the island. That leaves another half that would take 1 - 5 minutes. So if that's true, then it would take anywhere from 5 - 10 minutes to get from the North part to the South part of the island. So the map is in reality.. humongogous? It would take somewhere around 20-25 minutes to go around Alderney? Whooops!!! Sorry, when they said half of algonquin, i thought they meant half of one side, but now i understand its the left half of the island. Still, that's a long time though. In GTA3 it took less then 1 minute to get from the bottom half to the north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now