Mapping Los Santos! Building/landmark analysis

[InternetKillTV]

 

So what's the consensus on this?

 

SNIP

SNIP

 

I know it's hard to see details in the mountain pic but I definitely think they match up. If you look carefully at the first pic you can see the bridge in the circle and then the valley + waterfalls leading up in the other shots we've sound around that mountain.

Yep, you're right on the red one. If you look at GTAKiwi's map on the first post of this thread (or the screenshot version on page 404, which unfortunately has not yet been added to the first post) you can see that this area is just south/south-west of the Salton Sea. The river is at the north-western corner, but as stated earlier, it's probably not the green marker. It's actually a bit more to the right of that picture, but you're not far off.

Okay yeah that makes sense now. I feel like with the assistance of Kiwi's map we can really see just how the majority of the map is laid out. It all matches up with screenshots too. I'm starting to get accustomed with the map size, originally I thought it would be larger than what we have now but what we can see really makes sense.

 

I want to know what's on the other side of the mountain range. I believe, due to the following shots, that it's just the end of the mountains and coast. These are the only 2 shots we have, if I'm correct, facing the other side

 

1 Not much is seen, just the height lowering again

http://i.imgur.com/nyG2Rvb.jpg

 

2 Here you can really see the mountain lowering and on the horizon, ocean. The draw distance is long enough for us to see something there, if there was something.

http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg

 

Having said that, I feel at this point we're very high on the map. When we view this valley from the original shot in my other post of the full range we see this valley actually progressively gets higher. Anyway, I do think that at the bottom of the mountain on this side we'll have ocean.

 

Kiwi, if you're here, what do you make of it? Thought it might help expand that end of the map although not with much, just with water. If you agree that is.

 

EDIT real sorry for image size, I unfortunately don't know how to make them smaller. Would a mod like to for me?

Edited April 17, 2013 by Girish

[iiConTr0v3rSYx]

I was going to say that mountain on the left could be this one....

But this thing looks HUGE and I doubt we've seen it since the first trailer.

[Choco Taco]

So what's the consensus on this?

 

http://i.imgur.com/yJlsxnn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/rUnRuNq.jpg

 

I know it's hard to see details in the mountain pic but I definitely think they match up. If you look carefully at the first pic you can see the bridge in the circle and then the valley + waterfalls leading up in the other shots we've sound around that mountain.

http://i.imgur.com/XQhAQz5.jpg

 

http://i.imgur.com/BH4XtZ7.jpg

[36Chambers]

 

I was going to say that mountain on the left could be this one....

But this thing looks HUGE and I doubt we've seen it since the first trailer.

That mountain confuses me to this day. Some say it's Chiliad and others say otherwise... If that isn't Chiliad, I'll be flabbergasted when Rockstar finally shows of Chiliad. (assuming they haven't already). Also, if any can verify any mountain that is highly likely to be Chiliad, that'd be nice. It's just that I remember in one of the previews, (IGN or Gameinformer idk) they mentioned that Rockstar had given us a few glimpses of Chiliad, so it'd be strange to have a screenshot (Zancudo screen) show it in all it's glory.

[JonRenemy]

Look, GPK etc is a total fanny as we well know. Can we just ignore the inane sh*te and enjoy the topic and contribute in a positive way.

 

If we all pull together we can ignore the sackless cock itches and enjoy this great venture of mapping.

[dyz]

The GTA 5 map looks massive! People who think it's small must be blind, The picture i showed before it looks like Los santos GTA 5 is about halve the size of GTA SA! Now that is massive! Guys the map looks small because the picture is in the sky and the draw distance is really far which makes it look small. San Andreas felt massive because the draw distance was really little but GTA SA was big! like that picture i showed you of GTA SA the map doesn't really look that big because it shows the whole map.

[JoeM]

 

 

I know it was identified before the artwork, so probably stating the obvious but that seems to be the 1st Street Bridge

 

http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I000...dge-Bridges.jpg

 

http://bridgehunter.com/ca/los-angeles/53C1166/

 

*Edit.

 

It could actually be the East Cesar Chavez Viaduct, as that is next to the free way. If you look for it on the bridgehunter/google maps satalite view, you can see what I mean.

 

 

http://binged.it/112kXJd

 

Edited April 17, 2013 by JoeM

[Remi749]

 

Sorry if this has already been confirmed, but can we all agree that this:

http://www.igta5.com/images/trailer-2-bailout.jpg

 

Could be an overhead shot of this?

http://www.igta5.com/images/trailer-2-desert-highway.jpg

 

And this is showing that same area at a distance from a different viewpoint?

 

It looks like all of that should match up correctly right?

Is it just me or does the road in the 3rd shot look abit glitchy or a missing texture. Or i've got a sh*t eye sight.

I can see it too, it's something black, looks like shadow, but I can't see anything that made the shadow.

Or it could just be some new asphalt from a road construction... but we'll see...

[CaptainCapri]

Sorry if this has already been confirmed, but can we all agree that this:

http://www.igta5.com/images/trailer-2-bailout.jpg

 

It looks like all of that should match up correctly right?

Is it just me or does the road in the 3rd shot look abit glitchy or a missing texture. Or i've got a sh*t eye sight.

I can see it too, it's something black, looks like shadow, but I can't see anything that made the shadow.

Or it could just be some new asphalt from a road construction... but we'll see...

I think you're right, it does look like a newer road surfacing, I hope it is, I don't think any GTA has had 'patchy' road works like this before?

 

This certainly adds to the realism.

[omawnakw]

 

So what's the consensus on this?

 

SNIP

SNIP

 

I know it's hard to see details in the mountain pic but I definitely think they match up. If you look carefully at the first pic you can see the bridge in the circle and then the valley + waterfalls leading up in the other shots we've sound around that mountain.

Yep, you're right on the red one. If you look at GTAKiwi's map on the first post of this thread (or the screenshot version on page 404, which unfortunately has not yet been added to the first post) you can see that this area is just south/south-west of the Salton Sea. The river is at the north-western corner, but as stated earlier, it's probably not the green marker. It's actually a bit more to the right of that picture, but you're not far off.

Okay yeah that makes sense now. I feel like with the assistance of Kiwi's map we can really see just how the majority of the map is laid out. It all matches up with screenshots too. I'm starting to get accustomed with the map size, originally I thought it would be larger than what we have now but what we can see really makes sense.

 

I want to know what's on the other side of the mountain range. I believe, due to the following shots, that it's just the end of the mountains and coast. These are the only 2 shots we have, if I'm correct, facing the other side

 

1 Not much is seen, just the height lowering again

http://i.imgur.com/nyG2Rvb.jpg

 

2 Here you can really see the mountain lowering and on the horizon, ocean. The draw distance is long enough for us to see something there, if there was something.

http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg

 

Having said that, I feel at this point we're very high on the map. When we view this valley from the original shot in my other post of the full range we see this valley actually progressively gets higher. Anyway, I do think that at the bottom of the mountain on this side we'll have ocean.

 

Kiwi, if you're here, what do you make of it? Thought it might help expand that end of the map although not with much, just with water. If you agree that is.

 

EDIT real sorry for image size, I unfortunately don't know how to make them smaller. Would a mod like to for me?

I've reanalyzed screens with second river on them and I'm about to agree with GTAKiwi's alignment.

InternetKillTV, what did you mean when you said "the height lowering again"? That river landscape is lowering starting at Alamo Sea and to the horizon.

Or you mean that there are no mountains?

The better view from this point http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg is on the official screenshot (see the sixth one below).

Here is how i see this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

[omawnakw]

Here is the largest GTAKiwis map with landmarks i found with google and nineteenth screenshot:

 

Edited April 17, 2013 by omawnakw

[giant1987]

Fantastic Map Montage.

 

I'm sure that is almost 70% of real map.

[hulkhogan1]

So did someone say they were going to attempt to create a street map of Los Santos? I'd like to see how detailed of a map someone could create given the information we know.

[Argon]

So did someone say they were going to attempt to create a street map of Los Santos? I'd like to see how detailed of a map someone could create given the information we know.

I'm not sure if you're referring to me, but I had that idea a couple of pages back. I saw Fido's map and thought he did not add every detail. He later replied that he, in fact, had used everything that was shown on screenshots. I went over all the helicopter and plane shots, and found out that he was right: Allthough there are plenty of screenshots that give a scenic view of LS, the amount of usable information (especially in the background) is limited. Fido's map of the city is probably the most accurate and detailed map of LS we currently can get. I'm about to end my exam period, so I might find the time to go over them again, just for the possibility of finding a couple of uncharted streets, but it looks like an unneeded chore at the moment. Well that's perhaps a bit too harsh, though..

[un94]

Fantastic Map Montage.

 

I'm sure that is almost 70% of real map.

I hope not....

[Jordan_Philip]

That map is great. You guys put a ton of effort in figuring this stuff out.

 

The only thing i never agreed with was the location of the dam. I have a feeling that its holding back water from the alamo sea because if its not then where is that flow coming from? I dont think it from another lake and its definitely not coming from the surrounding ocean. My opinion is based on absolutely no research btw so if theres any evidence that says otherwise i want to see it!

 

for the great job peeps

[InternetKillTV]

So what's the consensus on this?

 

SNIP

SNIP

 

I know it's hard to see details in the mountain pic but I definitely think they match up. If you look carefully at the first pic you can see the bridge in the circle and then the valley + waterfalls leading up in the other shots we've sound around that mountain.

Yep, you're right on the red one. If you look at GTAKiwi's map on the first post of this thread (or the screenshot version on page 404, which unfortunately has not yet been added to the first post) you can see that this area is just south/south-west of the Salton Sea. The river is at the north-western corner, but as stated earlier, it's probably not the green marker. It's actually a bit more to the right of that picture, but you're not far off.

Okay yeah that makes sense now. I feel like with the assistance of Kiwi's map we can really see just how the majority of the map is laid out. It all matches up with screenshots too. I'm starting to get accustomed with the map size, originally I thought it would be larger than what we have now but what we can see really makes sense.

 

I want to know what's on the other side of the mountain range. I believe, due to the following shots, that it's just the end of the mountains and coast. These are the only 2 shots we have, if I'm correct, facing the other side

 

1 Not much is seen, just the height lowering again

http://i.imgur.com/nyG2Rvb.jpg

 

2 Here you can really see the mountain lowering and on the horizon, ocean. The draw distance is long enough for us to see something there, if there was something.

http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg

 

Having said that, I feel at this point we're very high on the map. When we view this valley from the original shot in my other post of the full range we see this valley actually progressively gets higher. Anyway, I do think that at the bottom of the mountain on this side we'll have ocean.

 

Kiwi, if you're here, what do you make of it? Thought it might help expand that end of the map although not with much, just with water. If you agree that is.

 

EDIT real sorry for image size, I unfortunately don't know how to make them smaller. Would a mod like to for me?

I've reanalyzed screens with second river on them and I'm about to agree with GTAKiwi's alignment.

InternetKillTV, what did you mean when you said "the height lowering again"? That river landscape is lowering starting at Alamo Sea and to the horizon.

Or you mean that there are no mountains?

The better view from this point http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg is on the official screenshot (see the sixth one below).

Here is how i see this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree up to the last 3 shots where you seem to have reversed your directions of the stream and the Alamo Sea. The stream is flowing into the Alamo sea, we have evidence of this by the waterfalls facing it and the fact that viewing the stream from the sea (which you can see above the bridge I marked in my first post) so your last shot where you reverse direction and claim that this waterfall is facing away the alamo sea I believe is wrong.

 

Anyway, my point was that I don't believe there is much beyond the screen where we see the plane flying. It is facing the opposite direction of the Alamo sea, following the stream up the mountain. If you look at the trailer cap rather than the official screenshot you are a little higher so you can see more. All I can see just after the mountain range is ocean, either that or a very short draw distance?

 

Get me?

[TwistedMedia]

 

Apparently, the countryside region of the map will be called Blaine County.

http://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/arti...-and-carry.html

Didn't we already know that? I'm sure that was mentioned in the GI article.

 

Also, I'm still under the impression that the map is the wrong way round. The created maps in this thread (which are amazing!) would match up with Southern Cali geographically if they were rotated clockwise to put LS on the west coast. This would then leave Alamo Sea to the east, as is the Salton Sea to Los Angeles.

I'm not sure if you're right. I'm not from LA (or USA), but do know a thing or two about the city and I'm pretty sure it's orientation is more or less like in V. The Hollywood Hills to the north (the valley beyond that), the ocean to the west, the famous beach, boulevard and pier to the west, Highway from santa monica leading to downtown (in the center obviously). In fact, I think most big highways are kinda in place. Airport and longbeach to the south.. The only thing that you can argue is Rockstar's version of the south/sout-eastern part. The seem to cut LA horizontally in the south, so that it resembles the shape of San Andreas' Los Santos. LA does have this corner shape, but ofcourse continues with landmass in the southeast, which LS will probably lack. So turning the city 90 degrees would not make any sense, with the exception of the Salton Sea.

 

I like the shape it currently seems to have. Sorta like San Andreas' LS (but with the beach and pier on the western edge), and north of the hills ofcourse the extention of the country side.

 

P.S: sorry for the double post, but I can't seem to figure out how to quote multiple people.

 

EDIT: quick idea, does reallife LA also have the North-South avenue's and West-East streets? Finding one LS streetname could set the whole orientation of the map. Somebody else probably already would have thought of it, though..

The trouble is that LA has a western coast, which the maps of V depict to be South instead of West. You are right in that it has a corner-like shape, and Long Beach is technically along the Southern coastline of LA, but the majority is still West.

 

 

 

This is probably the closest Los Santos map to LA, but depicts the city with a more triangular shape, therefore giving the whole of the Los Santos coastline a more 'south of the map' appearance:

 

 

I think that Los Santos will be the 'bottom-left corner of the map' rather than the only location along the southern border.

[ChillyPhilly]

So what's the consensus on this?

 

SNIP

SNIP

 

I know it's hard to see details in the mountain pic but I definitely think they match up. If you look carefully at the first pic you can see the bridge in the circle and then the valley + waterfalls leading up in the other shots we've sound around that mountain.

Yep, you're right on the red one. If you look at GTAKiwi's map on the first post of this thread (or the screenshot version on page 404, which unfortunately has not yet been added to the first post) you can see that this area is just south/south-west of the Salton Sea. The river is at the north-western corner, but as stated earlier, it's probably not the green marker. It's actually a bit more to the right of that picture, but you're not far off.

Okay yeah that makes sense now. I feel like with the assistance of Kiwi's map we can really see just how the majority of the map is laid out. It all matches up with screenshots too. I'm starting to get accustomed with the map size, originally I thought it would be larger than what we have now but what we can see really makes sense.

 

I want to know what's on the other side of the mountain range. I believe, due to the following shots, that it's just the end of the mountains and coast. These are the only 2 shots we have, if I'm correct, facing the other side

 

1 Not much is seen, just the height lowering again

http://i.imgur.com/nyG2Rvb.jpg

 

2 Here you can really see the mountain lowering and on the horizon, ocean. The draw distance is long enough for us to see something there, if there was something.

http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg

 

Having said that, I feel at this point we're very high on the map. When we view this valley from the original shot in my other post of the full range we see this valley actually progressively gets higher. Anyway, I do think that at the bottom of the mountain on this side we'll have ocean.

 

Kiwi, if you're here, what do you make of it? Thought it might help expand that end of the map although not with much, just with water. If you agree that is.

 

EDIT real sorry for image size, I unfortunately don't know how to make them smaller. Would a mod like to for me?

I've reanalyzed screens with second river on them and I'm about to agree with GTAKiwi's alignment.

InternetKillTV, what did you mean when you said "the height lowering again"? That river landscape is lowering starting at Alamo Sea and to the horizon.

Or you mean that there are no mountains?

The better view from this point http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg is on the official screenshot (see the sixth one below).

Here is how i see this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where does 'Zancudo River' fit into all of this?

[InternetKillTV]

So what's the consensus on this?

 

SNIP

SNIP

 

I know it's hard to see details in the mountain pic but I definitely think they match up. If you look carefully at the first pic you can see the bridge in the circle and then the valley + waterfalls leading up in the other shots we've sound around that mountain.

Yep, you're right on the red one. If you look at GTAKiwi's map on the first post of this thread (or the screenshot version on page 404, which unfortunately has not yet been added to the first post) you can see that this area is just south/south-west of the Salton Sea. The river is at the north-western corner, but as stated earlier, it's probably not the green marker. It's actually a bit more to the right of that picture, but you're not far off.

Okay yeah that makes sense now. I feel like with the assistance of Kiwi's map we can really see just how the majority of the map is laid out. It all matches up with screenshots too. I'm starting to get accustomed with the map size, originally I thought it would be larger than what we have now but what we can see really makes sense.

 

I want to know what's on the other side of the mountain range. I believe, due to the following shots, that it's just the end of the mountains and coast. These are the only 2 shots we have, if I'm correct, facing the other side

 

1 Not much is seen, just the height lowering again

http://i.imgur.com/nyG2Rvb.jpg

 

2 Here you can really see the mountain lowering and on the horizon, ocean. The draw distance is long enough for us to see something there, if there was something.

http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg

 

Having said that, I feel at this point we're very high on the map. When we view this valley from the original shot in my other post of the full range we see this valley actually progressively gets higher. Anyway, I do think that at the bottom of the mountain on this side we'll have ocean.

 

Kiwi, if you're here, what do you make of it? Thought it might help expand that end of the map although not with much, just with water. If you agree that is.

 

EDIT real sorry for image size, I unfortunately don't know how to make them smaller. Would a mod like to for me?

I've reanalyzed screens with second river on them and I'm about to agree with GTAKiwi's alignment.

InternetKillTV, what did you mean when you said "the height lowering again"? That river landscape is lowering starting at Alamo Sea and to the horizon.

Or you mean that there are no mountains?

The better view from this point http://i.imgur.com/loPi38R.jpg is on the official screenshot (see the sixth one below).

Here is how i see this:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where does 'Zancudo River' fit into all of this?

Kiwi puts it here:

 

 

In relation to Kiwi's map I agree with it. I'm a little unconvinced though. It does make sense especially in relation to everything else he's put together but I just feel like we should be seeing more of the other mountains nearby from the shot we have of Zancudo and we don't. Probably just me though.

[omawnakw]

 

I agree up to the last 3 shots where you seem to have reversed your directions of the stream and the Alamo Sea. The stream is flowing into the Alamo sea, we have evidence of this by the waterfalls facing it and the fact that viewing the stream from the sea (which you can see above the bridge I marked in my first post) so your last shot where you reverse direction and claim that this waterfall is facing away the alamo sea I believe is wrong.

 

Anyway, my point was that I don't believe there is much beyond the screen where we see the plane flying. It is facing the opposite direction of the Alamo sea, following the stream up the mountain. If you look at the trailer cap rather than the official screenshot you are a little higher so you can see more. All I can see just after the mountain range is ocean, either that or a very short draw distance?

 

Get me?

It could be just the haze, i don't know.

 

I do not agree about you vision of the stream and Alamo Sea.

Let's put it so:

On my first pic we seethe bridge, stream direction here is aligned according next shots. What i see here - there is no waterfall, just flat water at the sea side of the bridge. There are some bar on the water at the camera side but i can't reliably identify what is that.

On the second screenshot we see the bridge from the first one and the train bridge with left tunnel which have the furrow on the rock. Also we see the road under the left tunnel entrance.

On the third and fourth ones we see Left tunnel entrance with the same furrow.

The fifth shot is one of the frames from trailer next to the second one in my post. Stream on it is aligned according to sixth one. We see two different rocks with original shape on it (marked Rock L and Rock R), that pretty identical to the ones from the next screen.

On the sixth pic we see the same waterfall and the same stone wich spilts the stream, and the same tree on it. Also we see the road passing under the left tunnel entrance. Shots six and seven are definitely depicting same bridge from different sides.

So the gray ribbon above the green circle on your first shot is apparently not this river, and it could not to be a river at all, maybe road?

If to trust GTAKiwi's map with screenshot mark, that ribbon is aligned between points E and G, when our river is to the right of G. Check it.

[un94]

Map looks pretty accurate, good job.

 

But I hope that this is only 25 - 35 % of the entire map, otherwise it would be pretty small, quite boring and stale in my opinion (from what we've seen so far). And flying wouldn't make sense.

 

Great job guys!!

[omawnakw]

Map looks pretty accurate, good job.

 

But I hope that this is only 25 - 35 % of the entire map, otherwise it would be pretty small, quite boring and stale in my opinion (from what we've seen so far). And flying wouldn't make sense.

 

Great job guys!!

Yeah, we dunno what is on the other side of the tunnel (enrance R in my post).

[Argon]

Apparently, the countryside region of the map will be called Blaine County.

http://www.rockstargames.com/newswire/arti...-and-carry.html

Didn't we already know that? I'm sure that was mentioned in the GI article.

 

Also, I'm still under the impression that the map is the wrong way round. The created maps in this thread (which are amazing!) would match up with Southern Cali geographically if they were rotated clockwise to put LS on the west coast. This would then leave Alamo Sea to the east, as is the Salton Sea to Los Angeles.

I'm not sure if you're right. I'm not from LA (or USA), but do know a thing or two about the city and I'm pretty sure it's orientation is more or less like in V. The Hollywood Hills to the north (the valley beyond that), the ocean to the west, the famous beach, boulevard and pier to the west, Highway from santa monica leading to downtown (in the center obviously). In fact, I think most big highways are kinda in place. Airport and longbeach to the south.. The only thing that you can argue is Rockstar's version of the south/sout-eastern part. The seem to cut LA horizontally in the south, so that it resembles the shape of San Andreas' Los Santos. LA does have this corner shape, but ofcourse continues with landmass in the southeast, which LS will probably lack. So turning the city 90 degrees would not make any sense, with the exception of the Salton Sea.

 

I like the shape it currently seems to have. Sorta like San Andreas' LS (but with the beach and pier on the western edge), and north of the hills ofcourse the extention of the country side.

 

P.S: sorry for the double post, but I can't seem to figure out how to quote multiple people.

 

EDIT: quick idea, does reallife LA also have the North-South avenue's and West-East streets? Finding one LS streetname could set the whole orientation of the map. Somebody else probably already would have thought of it, though..

The trouble is that LA has a western coast, which the maps of V depict to be South instead of West. You are right in that it has a corner-like shape, and Long Beach is technically along the Southern coastline of LA, but the majority is still West.

 

 

 

This is probably the closest Los Santos map to LA, but depicts the city with a more triangular shape, therefore giving the whole of the Los Santos coastline a more 'south of the map' appearance:

 

 

I think that Los Santos will be the 'bottom-left corner of the map' rather than the only location along the southern border.

Yeah, but that's GTAKiwi's interpretation. He has stated that LS is not accurate in his map and he primarily focusses on the countryside. Fido's map of LS makes the western beach look more like reallife, with the pier almost running East-West. Almost.

[giant1987]

33% LS

 

33% Countryside

 

33% Mountains

 

That's my prediction about the real GTA V map.

[J-B]

Map looks pretty accurate, good job.

 

But I hope that this is only 25 - 35 % of the entire map, otherwise it would be pretty small, quite boring and stale in my opinion (from what we've seen so far). And flying wouldn't make sense.

 

Great job guys!!

Better move that figure up to 60-70% to be realistic. The map will most likely be 20-25 square miles max, and that's fine with me.

[Red XIII]

Its estimated that Red dead redemption is at least 20 square miles, san andreas is 13 and gtaIV is 7 square miles. So if rockstars statement about GTAV'S map size is true its going to be at least 35 square miles.

[un94]

 

Map looks pretty accurate, good job.

 

But I hope that this is only 25 - 35 % of the entire map, otherwise it would be pretty small, quite boring and stale in my opinion (from what we've seen so far). And flying wouldn't make sense.

 

Great job guys!!   

Better move that figure up to 60-70% to be realistic. The map will most likely be 20-25 square miles max, and that's fine with me.

Yeah but there are not really forest and farm areas (which were promised in GI), wetlands an other towns.

Also the big mountain from Trailer #1 seems to be pretty far away from the locations on the map on this page. It doesn't seem to be near Alamo Sea/Los Santos/Zancudo River.

[Argon]

 

Map looks pretty accurate, good job.

 

But I hope that this is only 25 - 35 % of the entire map, otherwise it would be pretty small, quite boring and stale in my opinion (from what we've seen so far). And flying wouldn't make sense.

 

Great job guys!!   

Better move that figure up to 60-70% to be realistic. The map will most likely be 20-25 square miles max, and that's fine with me.

Agree. If I'm being really optimistic, I say we have seen about 50%. The 'triangle' unknown region directly NW of LS, the eastern area behind the dam, and ofcourse the whole northern region behind the Salton Sea. But realistically, I'd say we've seen about 2/3 of the map. Made a very quick sketch how I feel and hope it turns out to be. Not accurate, ofcourse, and pure speculation. Didn´t really think it through.

 

[ChillyPhilly]

 

Kiwi puts it here:

 

 

In relation to Kiwi's map I agree with it. I'm a little unconvinced though. It does make sense especially in relation to everything else he's put together but I just feel like we should be seeing more of the other mountains nearby from the shot we have of Zancudo and we don't. Probably just me though.

 

That's pretty agreeable. This just shows what parts of the map have been shown heavily, and what parts haven't (e.g. Grapeseed), meaning that there's tons to look at.