Cdnalsi Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Hey, so how much smaller is GTA IV (map-wise) compared to San Andreas? I do remember there was a thread about this a while ago, somebody actually super-imposed maps from both games, there was this whole discussion about scale and stuff... And then I stopped following that thread, and it went away. So I'm just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freak2121 Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 It's actually much bigger if you take out the wasted space in SA, but other wise it's 2/3 or 3/4 the size of SA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdnalsi Posted August 12, 2008 Author Share Posted August 12, 2008 What do you mean wasted space in San Andreas? The out-backs? I thought that was pretty awesome to fly a plane over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d00d Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Apparently, IV's Liberty City was about 3/4 the size of San Andreas, according to previews of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
--Vega-- Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 What do you mean wasted space in San Andreas? The out-backs? I thought that was pretty awesome to fly a plane over I agree. San Andreas wouldn't have been the same without the countryside and desert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bzuva Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Yea, the rural area and the deserts are the hottest feature of SA to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce Deuce Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 What do you mean wasted space in San Andreas? The out-backs? I thought that was pretty awesome to fly a plane over The countryside and the desert. They didn't really serve much use, that's what people mean by 'wasted space'. Everywhere you go in GTA IV has life and different things going on. In terms of scope, IV is MUCH bigger than SA. Scale-wise, it's about 3/4 the size of SA's map. Still, it's a lot more fun when there's more variety of stuff. Also, this has jack all to do with the PC version. This way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidan87 Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 (edited) IV's LC is approximately 55-65% of SA or maybe 3/5 of it. It is slightly larger than SA's half though. But there are almost no empty spaces and the whole city is pretty detailed, so it will seem larger. But I can assure you it's no where 3/4 of SA like what reviews say.. it is actually smaller than that. Well at least you could cross from one side of the city to the other by helicopter in less than half a minute. (i.e from west Alderney to the airport) Edit:- Added "by helicopter" Edited August 13, 2008 by aidan87 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdnalsi Posted August 12, 2008 Author Share Posted August 12, 2008 Cross the city in half a minute, by car??? That sounds like it's really small. I haven't timed this, but I'd say it takes me a good 5-6 minutes to get from Grove Street in Los Santos to, well, say Jizzy's Club under the Bridge in San Fierro, which is not actually crossing the entire map... I'll time, to see how much it is in reality... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graven Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 PC DVD is 120mm too. It´s not that special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash_735 Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 That's not a good comparison, haha, From Alderney the main highway leads directly into Algonquin, from Algonquin it's just a straight shot Road and a few quick turns to then get onto the bridge to Charge Island and quickly into Dukes where another Highway leads you directly to the Airport. Going by that standard you can cross the entire Las Venturas and get into Los Santos in 20 seconds flat since the Highway leads directly through both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdnalsi Posted August 12, 2008 Author Share Posted August 12, 2008 Okay, do you have the game? Can you time yourself doing a diagonal? I'll do it tonight in San Andreas. Don't take highways. Just drive like usual on a diagonal across the map and time yourself. I'm really curious about the outcome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackmackg Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 i was playing gta sa not long ago and i got to say GTAIV is smaller. this "waste space" was really good space. you cold speed up use it as ramps ect. in gta iv most of the space is taken up buy buildings and you cant drive trow those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidan87 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 (edited) Cross the city in half a minute, by car??? That sounds like it's really small. I haven't timed this, but I'd say it takes me a good 5-6 minutes to get from Grove Street in Los Santos to, well, say Jizzy's Club under the Bridge in San Fierro, which is not actually crossing the entire map... I'll time, to see how much it is in reality... Sorry, I meant by helicopter. But by car? thats 1 and half minute or maybe less, not really sure. But yes, the map isn't huge by scale, but it is very detailed. Edited August 13, 2008 by aidan87 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cimt Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 I remember someone laying the IV map on top of the SA map. SA was bigger. It was on here, I can't remember which thread though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cshmech Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Sometimes it pisses u off to travel such long distances unnecessarily.. But having 4 islands within 3/5th of SA space is cool, if its filled with more variety.. How have you felt when ur rides blasted, in the middle of that hilly desert.. How u felt like u have to run js like that till u find some road where hardly any hijackable vehicle comes?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidan87 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Sometimes it pisses u off to travel such long distances unnecessarily.. But having 4 islands within 3/5th of SA space is cool, if its filled with more variety.. How have you felt when ur rides blasted, in the middle of that hilly desert.. How u felt like u have to run js like that till u find some road where hardly any hijackable vehicle comes?? IMO, it becomes very boring when you keep cruising in this "awesomely detailed" city, because you will do NOTHING but to drive around. TBH, the game map is huge, but the game itself ISN'T. There isn't alot of interiors, features, things that you can do while hanging out, etc.. So if this topic's question referring to the map I'd say SA is BIGGER but not as detailed as IV. And if it is referring to the terms of gameplay and fun, SA wins here Aidan runs away before GTA IV fanboys arrive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cshmech Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 IMO, it becomes very boring when you keep cruising in this "awesomely detailed" city, because you will do NOTHING but to drive around. TBH, the game map is huge, but the game itself ISN'T. There isn't alot of interiors, features, things that you can do while hanging out, etc..So if this topic's question referring to the map I'd say SA is BIGGER but not as detailed as IV. And if it is referring to the terms of gameplay and fun, SA wins here Aidan runs away before GTA IV fanboys arrive! Errrmm..,, SA wins where?? Do u mean to say IVs gameplay is not upto SA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoubleOGJohnson Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 SA is not wasted space cuz those spaces gave us a big variety of lifestyles. I personally dont care for wide spaces cuz in real life Im a cityboy. So when I play SA Im always in a city but SA atleast gave the option. Thats why GTA had wild appeal, cuz its a game that had something fun for EVERYBODY. San Andreas was like a world, nothing looked the same from place to place. Venturas, San Fierro, and Los Santos all were different. Los Santos itself was like a world of contrast. On one end you had the ghettos of South Central and the Eastside where people were struggling to live, then you had the upscale Westside full of people completely removed from the chaos going on just a few neighborhoods away. Los Santos wasnt as big as the 4 boroughs but the way that things were so different made the city feel big. Liberty City feels like a confining group of islands where the only thing that changes from place to place are the peds. So how can you say San Andreas who gave us a miniature universe were wasting of space? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EL BENSON Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 its something around 20 square miles, it doesnt really stack up land wise but its got alot more in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash_735 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Someone on here mentioned the scales once and they were most accurate, something like the San Andreas Map was around 13 square miles and the Liberty City Map was around 9 square miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aidan87 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Errrmm..,, SA wins where?? Do u mean to say IVs gameplay is not upto SA? Yes, SA has alot more features than IV. Infact, we can't compare them. IV is different from SA IMO. It is like GTA 3 in the previous generation. It is only the start. Expect SA features(and probably more) in the next GTAs, but not on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 This is the thread you are looking for (thanks to Kitteh) http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?act=ST&f=120&t=356209&st= Size of SA is some 14 square miles, while the size of LC is something less the 5. You do the math. this is nowhere near the claimed 75%. @EL BENSON: what 20 square miles? What are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash_735 Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 This is the thread you are looking for (thanks to Kitteh) http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?act=ST&f=120&t=356209&st= Size of SA is some 14 square miles, while the size of LC is something less the 5. You do the math. this is nowhere near the claimed 75%. @EL BENSON: what 20 square miles? What are you talking about? Judging from this pic: http://img409.imageshack.us/my.php?image=compareoi9.jpg LC is ok, it's certainly more than 5 square miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texukijinrex Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 hmm gta 4 is much bigger because san andreas has a bigger maps because they add dessert and forest which is a waste of location and the city in san andreas is small san andreas has 3 city while gta 4 has 4 island is equal to 4 city Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash_735 Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 hmm gta 4 is much bigger because san andreas has a bigger maps because they add dessert and forest which is a waste of location and the city in san andreas is small san andreas has 3 city while gta 4 has 4 island is equal to 4 city You can't just dispose of the Desert and Forest, just because they arn't a city doesn't mean they arn't an area to travel and mess around in. But yes, Rockstar confirmed that LC IS smaller than San Andreas BUT it IS the biggest City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyer2359 Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 The reason why GTA IV doesn't have forest and deserts os because New York City doesn't have them in real life. From Island too Island in GTA IV it's like a whole different world one island can be filled with oil companies while lower manhattan has the $$$ and famous buildings and then other islands can be mixed together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrKlorox Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 The countryside and the desert were not wasted space in the least. That's the only thing worth messing around with this far after SA's launch. I'll seem to always come across a new ramp/hill/etc that I've never driven over before. The only thing resembling wasted space in the rural areas was plateaus and gigantic rocks in the desert that were non-accessible... much like almost every building in the game. I much prefer open space to the confining traffic filled congestion of a city-only map... I find myself messing around in parks and on the beach in GTA4 more than I should. Do people really consider the country/desert of SA to be equivalent to the beach in VC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuvip Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 the liberty city is smaller than SA, but it not small, it big, more than VC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medfreak Posted August 14, 2008 Share Posted August 14, 2008 I don't know about you, but the largest fun I ever had in SA was when I did the trucker missions, and fired up the countryside music in the background. That gave me goosebumps whenever I did it... SA was a great great game. I still have not tried GTA IV though. 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