Huge maps and good graphics are NOT impossible...

[Isuck100%]

Just Cause 2 is just one big copy/pasted land patch after another. GTA IV was pushing the consoles a lot more with its unsurpassed level of detail and all the processes at work like NaturalMotion's Euphoria.

[allhailkingryan]

Holy f*cking sh*t c*nts. The game FUEL has an area of 14,000 square KM. Thats like at least 700x bigger than san andreas, and its 14x bigger than Jc2. Strangely enough, it has so many varied environments. Unfortunately, its a sh*t game due to the fact that the vehicle handling is crap. Can you imagine GTA on that map? Having to travel 200 miles to pick your friend. Now that would be TOO be big. I would love to see GTA5 be the same size as big as JC2, so long as the map is detailed

[Mister Pink]

Yeah, I'd like a huge map too only if it was the detail either stayed the same or improved though. IV's map was a little small. Well, not that it was small, it was biggish but there wasn't enough varied terrain in which I enjoyed in San Andreas. Having a map as that was impressive and surprisingly big as SA at the time was such a joy. It's like have 3 or 4 games in one. I loved travelling from city to city, exploring the countryside and desert etc. It kept the game fresh and there was seemingly endless places to explore.

 

I hope V can move towards this. Having the level of detail is amazing in IV but the grey metropolis got tired quicker than S.A. for me. I miss seeing nice sunrises over hills and trees, standing on top of a mountain watching the sunrise or flying over the desert at sunset and watching the sky turn purple.

 

If they can retain the detail and add super features and a big, big map, I'll be a very happy man.

[TenEightyOne]

I don't know why there's this perennial idea that potential map size is somehow limited by console power.

 

The map doesn't need to be drawn all at once, so the actual number of 'scenes' to be drawn only ever equals 1. View distance is something else of course...

[Snake Without a Tongue]

What was wrong with GTA IV's map size?

 

Having played/owned JC2 although its map size is impressive I don't think I would like that big of a map for GTA. Honestly I still have a blast playing VC which by today's standards is pretty small.

 

IMHO GTA doesn't need an enormous map. It's not Far Cry, or Oblivion.

I agree. Every time I finish a GTA I feel like they wasted map. There are all sorts of areas that would've made great set pieces that get totally ignored in gameplay. Be like the noble Indian and use every part of the animal, R*.

[Mister Pink]

Thing about S.A. was they had safehouses all over the map so no area was wasted in my opinion. There was a great selection of places you could chose from to start your game.

[Toup]

Not avaliable on consoles? Pc exclusive! :>

[flotwig]

Note the considerable lack of detail in the Just cause 2 map.

[ryan_J]

Note the considerable lack of detail in the Just cause 2 map.

I wouldnt call it lack of detail its more just a waste of space, the map is detailed but thats because most of the map is just rainforest.

[blowtorchrepair]

 

Yes it possible, but JC" was mainly countryside, plus it's cities were empty and boring, gta always has a lot going on at one time, plus alot of people imo seem to neglect the amount of work that goes into making a gta city, look at gta4, lc is painstakingly detailed, every ally is prob more detailed and interesting than a city in jc2.

My 2 cents anyway

right. the natural parts of JC2's map are great. The dev did a good job of creating jungle that looks pattern-less, imo, and the water and sky are lovely as well. however, the cities are lame, consisting of several typical building types and little culture. and there's no online mp, at least a free roam.

 

a map the size of JC2's with several cities as detailed and as cultured as in GTA IV would be nice.. half the size of JC2 would even work. hopefully an increased stray distance from vehicles and aircraft, before they disappear from the map, in mp modes will accompany a larger map

Edited August 14, 2011 by blowtorchrepair

[Slamman]

One of the reasons for this long wait are those two attributes being the case with making the game, so I agree, yeah

[GroomLake51]

First: JC2's graphics were impressive. The only downside, in my opinion, was the boring cities (which reminded of the cities in SimCopter, for the ones who remember that goodness-awful helicopter simulation).

 

The size? I sort of liked it. Allows you, the player, so much more to explore. However, if we do get a significant map size, I want easy ways to get around it. High speed rail, jets, jetpacks. Whatever you have to do, Rockstar. Just don't make me take 30 minute drive.

 

Given one over the other, though, I'd want quality. I love how detailed Rockstar does their cities (GTA IV being a prime example).

 

Whatever Rockstar does, I'm sure we'll all be impressed come release day.

[Slamman]

The PC polishing mods for GTA IV's graphics are something I hope become accessible for all gamers of GTA, I hope they seriously look at making the Uber Hardware available down the road, and it's not so severely limited to the console capability, but that being said, I think the artists own limitations come to bear and they have to improve their own artistic ability, Computers don't do all the work, obviously

[mediocore]

I think everyone is missing the point here...

 

Although it may be possible to have a large map in the next GTA, if they brought out a game as terrible as JC2 just to fit in a bigger map I would not be happy

[allhailkingryan]

I think everyone is missing the point here...

 

Although it may be possible to have a large map in the next GTA, if they brought out a game as terrible as JC2 just to fit in a bigger map I would not be happy

R* would do a great job on GTA if it was set on the Moon. I'd be slughtly dissapointed if GTA5 isn't as big as SA.

[GTA_stu]

JC 2 graphics were not better than GTA IV. It was just the same textures used over and over again, and the game itself was very reptitive. A map as big as JC 2 and with IV's graphics is simply not possible.

[mr quick]

-

Edited April 27, 2016 by Marwin

[Mr.Moffat]

Why to people think Lc was so small? it was'nt, imo it was only slightly smaller overall than the whole of SA, plus lc had more complexity such as rooftops, tunnels, underpasses, subways, alleys etc, there was prob more streets and alleys in one block compared to halr a city in SA, plus place in SA were tiny, such as Airports and ports, where as in gta4 they were massive.

IS it becasue SA just had more towns citeis and enviroments?

[mr quick]

-

Edited April 27, 2016 by Marwin

[Magic_Al]

 

Why to people think Lc was so small? it was'nt, imo it was only slightly smaller overall than the whole of SA, plus lc had more complexity such as rooftops, tunnels, underpasses, subways, alleys etc, there was prob more streets and alleys in one block compared to halr a city in SA, plus place in SA were tiny, such as Airports and ports, where as in gta4 they were massive.

IS it becasue SA just had more towns citeis and enviroments?

I also thought about this, the thing is that SA not only IS huge, but gives us an impression that it is even bigger!

Whether you think LC is small depends whether you know its actual size or not. Someone worked out by measuring helicopter flight distances vs. the map that the area is 6 square miles, and software can measure the map to see that it's half land, half water. Rockstar never officially stated the size of Liberty City but they gave out the size of San Andreas in an interview (36 square km = 13.9 square miles) and that area is mostly land.

 

It's fair to say San Andreas has twice the land of Liberty City, but almost all the extra land in SA is rural. I believe Rockstar's artists spent as many hours on Liberty City as San Andreas, and it took twice as long to do everything in GTA IV because of the detail.

 

San Andreas is able to feel even bigger than it is because the map being a little bigger increases the area to do transitions between different areas and the effect of being in the middle of somewhere (or nowhere) is multiplied. Rockstar is brilliant considering sight lines and you don't see that a completely different environment is behind the hill in front of you.