Mapping Los Santos! Building/landmark analysis

[K20]

 

@Fido and @Kiwi :don't you think the dam should be filled with water by some source:

 

by the Alamo Sea? thus, there should be a river/channel that connects them

 

OR

 

dam could be filled by a spring (font) in those mountains around (cause i am with impression that Alamo Sea is at a lower level than the water in the Dam, so a river connecting them is impossible [water doesn't climb ])

 

OR

 

Dam is filled by a channel/river coming from the east Ocean, but that would be stupid, water would circulate from East ocean to South ocean

Alamo sea is too low, so you're right it can't be the source (without the use of pumps, but eh...)

 

The only thing filling it is the rainfall and the rain from higher up on the hill that the dam's on, if we're going to treat it as something realistic. Strangely we've nott really seen much of the dam hill in any media.

 

If this waterfall's source is the Alamo (which many seem to have indicated based on their maps) then the Alamo is quite high as seen in this screen.

Thus, we cannot rule out the Alamo as potential source of water for the dam.

Can someone please point out the waterfall in this screen? I have never been able to see it.

its on the left.... towards the top. behind the tree. you can see the water river suddenly stopping. or cuttin off [as theres no land after that point, except at a much lower altitude]. thats the drop of the water...

[kesta195]

^^ I think I see it, thanks.

[gtamodeller]

 

dont know if you made this map, with five rdr put together. If so, i think you should only count the playable area and not the whole map.

[kesta195]

I wonder if we can expect Chiliad to be as tall as the desert mountain in Just Cause 2, because that thing was huge.

[zombie elvis]

 

I wonder if we can expect Chiliad to be as tall as the desert mountain in Just Cause 2, because that thing was huge.

It was, and still not the highest point.

 

From my very rough guesses and measurements I'd say GTA V's is about as tall as the length of 1.5 grid squares on the blueprint. But that assumes the mountains are placed where I put them on my map.

 

If I'm right it should be between 1 and 2 miles high depending on the scale of the map.

Edited June 6, 2013 by zombie elvis

[kesta195]

I wonder if we can expect Chiliad to be as tall as the desert mountain in Just Cause 2, because that thing was huge.

It was, and still not the highest point.

Yeah, but the highest one on the mountains was pretty bad for base jumping, whereas the south slope of the desert one was pretty much a sheer drop all the way to sea level . I think it was in the 1.5-2km range, height wise. I suppose there is no way to calculate how large the two mountains in GTAV are.

[RockStarNiko]

I have never played JC2 but I don't understand all the negative reaction it gets.

 

In an ideal world for me, GTA V would have the same immense environment to play in as that game, but GTA style, which is important.

 

2 things put me off playing JC2.

 

a) The grapple gun gimmick does not appeal to me. If we moved around similar to regular Niko character would suit me more.

 

b) 100% would take too much time to complete, also I hear it is bugged.

 

 

In terms of the actual game world and environment it looks amazing and the scale is perfect for what I would want.

 

I don't understand why we can not have a GTA game that is around 100 sq miles, if they are making games 400 sq miles.

 

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

[kesta195]

 

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

San Andreas was pretty detailed for a PS2 open world game that large. Detail is essential. Just Cause 2 is proof of this, believe me, I have played it for about 100 hours and it is not detailed at all, which makes exploration boring as f*ck. The only thing left to do is fly around and base jump, which sounds fun and is for about 20 minutes. GTA should only go to that scale if they can make the world as interesting as GTAIV is or V will be.

[RockStarNiko]

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

San Andreas was pretty detailed for a PS2 open world game that large. Detail is essential. Just Cause 2 is proof of this, believe me, I have played it for about 100 hours and it is not detailed at all, which makes exploration boring as f*ck. The only thing left to do is fly around and base jump, which sounds fun and is for about 20 minutes. GTA should only go to that scale if they can make the world as interesting as GTAIV is or V will be.

What do you define as detail? Before TBOGT and TLAD I considered GTA IV to be a very dull game outside of the story missions.

 

GTA IV complete edition is much better game than original GTA IV because of all the added stuff that is actually FUN.

 

San Andreas was full of fun stuff and that is why it is my favourite GTA game, with GTA IV complete my second favourite.

 

So, what kind of detail is present in GTA IV that is absent in JC2, after you have completed everything to do in both games?

[PoliceFarm]

 

I have never played JC2 but I don't understand all the negative reaction it gets.

 

In an ideal world for me, GTA V would have the same immense environment to play in as that game, but GTA style, which is important.

 

2 things put me off playing JC2.

 

a) The grapple gun gimmick does not appeal to me. If we moved around similar to regular Niko character would suit me more.

 

b) 100% would take too much time to complete, also I hear it is bugged.

 

 

In terms of the actual game world and environment it looks amazing and the scale is perfect for what I would want.

 

I don't understand why we can not have a GTA game that is around 100 sq miles, if they are making games 400 sq miles.

 

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

You should play it before you can really say how good or bad it is. I think its a good game but not anything as good as GTA. And making a map that over the top big can be cool at times, like sky diving from really high up and the sense of scale when flying planes, but most of the time it just makes commutes tedious because the driving isn't as good and there's nothing good to listen too. With the scale of the game as big as it is, trust me you'll be grateful for that grappling hook, the game is unplayable without it.

 

And the reason why GTA V will be much smaller is because JC2 is "randomly" generated, its the same everytime but the actual game was built based on randomly generated areas, while Rockstar designs and builds every part of the map, thinking about how it could be fun to drive through.

[kesta195]

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

San Andreas was pretty detailed for a PS2 open world game that large. Detail is essential. Just Cause 2 is proof of this, believe me, I have played it for about 100 hours and it is not detailed at all, which makes exploration boring as f*ck. The only thing left to do is fly around and base jump, which sounds fun and is for about 20 minutes. GTA should only go to that scale if they can make the world as interesting as GTAIV is or V will be.

What do you define as detail? Before TBOGT and TLAD I considered GTA IV to be a very dull game outside of the story missions.

 

GTA IV complete edition is much better game than original GTA IV because of all the added stuff that is actually FUN.

 

San Andreas was full of fun stuff and that is why it is my favourite GTA game, with GTA IV complete my second favourite.

 

So, what kind of detail is present in GTA IV that is absent in JC2, after you have completed everything to do in both games?

Every area is unique in the GTA games, whereas Just Cause 2 is full of copy-pasted areas. Instead of making a huge game just for the sake of it they should have toned it down and made it more interesting. If you thought the city in GTAIV was dull, wait until you play Just Cause 2. The pedestrians are like robots, and might as well not even be there. Most of the buildings are the same. There are 4 districts but it is almost impossible to differentiate between them. Don't get me wrong, it's a good game while it lasts and I was massively hyped for it, but that's because I went in expecting GTA with a huge varied world and that's just not what it is. Even the missions are repetitive. There are like 15 stronghold take over missions that are EXACTLY the same, literally. Imagine drug wars in TBOGT as actual missions, and even more repetitive.

[JonRenemy]

If people don't want to appreciate details and atmosphere, then no amount of talking will make it happen. GTA's beautiful details are either appreciated or not. Simple as that.

 

People who pine for another SAndreas bore me.. because that game looked so dull. Yes it was fun but I also like to feel like I can get swept up in the feel and mood of a game, not just do crazy sh*t all the time.

 

GTA IV had life and character about it. You get that feeling (if you appreciate the details) that you can see something new happening every few seconds.

 

I can't wait for GTA V because I know it will be like this except massively deeper. It actually scares me a bit.

[simonp92]

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

San Andreas was pretty detailed for a PS2 open world game that large. Detail is essential. Just Cause 2 is proof of this, believe me, I have played it for about 100 hours and it is not detailed at all, which makes exploration boring as f*ck. The only thing left to do is fly around and base jump, which sounds fun and is for about 20 minutes. GTA should only go to that scale if they can make the world as interesting as GTAIV is or V will be.

What do you define as detail? Before TBOGT and TLAD I considered GTA IV to be a very dull game outside of the story missions.

 

GTA IV complete edition is much better game than original GTA IV because of all the added stuff that is actually FUN.

 

San Andreas was full of fun stuff and that is why it is my favourite GTA game, with GTA IV complete my second favourite.

 

So, what kind of detail is present in GTA IV that is absent in JC2, after you have completed everything to do in both games?

You obviously define "detail" very differently, considering EFLC and GTA IV both use the same map. Atlas same amount of detail. That is why JC2 is being hated on, because once you've seen 2% of the map, you've seen all of it. Everything looks the same.

GTA IV on the other hand, is extremely detailed and varied. Like GTA V will be.

 

 

[RockStarNiko]

I have never played JC2 but I don't understand all the negative reaction it gets.

 

In an ideal world for me, GTA V would have the same immense environment to play in as that game, but GTA style, which is important.

 

2 things put me off playing JC2.

 

a) The grapple gun gimmick does not appeal to me. If we moved around similar to regular Niko character would suit me more.

 

b) 100% would take too much time to complete, also I hear it is bugged.

 

 

In terms of the actual game world and environment it looks amazing and the scale is perfect for what I would want.

 

I don't understand why we can not have a GTA game that is around 100 sq miles, if they are making games 400 sq miles.

 

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

You should play it before you can really say how good or bad it is. I think its a good game but not anything as good as GTA. And making a map that over the top big can be cool at times, like sky diving from really high up and the sense of scale when flying planes, but most of the time it just makes commutes tedious because the driving isn't as good and there's nothing good to listen too. With the scale of the game as big as it is, trust me you'll be grateful for that grappling hook, the game is unplayable without it.

 

And the reason why GTA V will be much smaller is because JC2 is "randomly" generated, its the same everytime but the actual game was built based on randomly generated areas, while Rockstar designs and builds every part of the map, thinking about how it could be fun to drive through.

Personally I have no issues with taking my time driving through a map.

 

At the moment I am playing Far Cry 3 and I have used fast travel ONCE at the very start of the game after it instructed me to do so.

 

I prefer to make my own way around the map, I did the same with RDR and Skyrim. I dislike fast travel that has been introduced into modern games, also dislike autosave but that is irrelevant really.

 

I actually WANT to play in a game world as large as JC2, but the actual mechanics of JC2 are what put me off it.

 

The game world itself looks amazing and I just wish RockStar would make a GTA game set in a huge world like JC2.

[kesta195]

I have never played JC2 but I don't understand all the negative reaction it gets.

 

In an ideal world for me, GTA V would have the same immense environment to play in as that game, but GTA style, which is important.

 

2 things put me off playing JC2.

 

a) The grapple gun gimmick does not appeal to me. If we moved around similar to regular Niko character would suit me more.

 

b) 100% would take too much time to complete, also I hear it is bugged.

 

 

In terms of the actual game world and environment it looks amazing and the scale is perfect for what I would want.

 

I don't understand why we can not have a GTA game that is around 100 sq miles, if they are making games 400 sq miles.

 

All the nonsense about graphics and detail is ridiculous argument. San Andreas was a great game and my favourite GTA game, the detail in that game was pathetic so, who cares about graphics and details. JC2 looks good with lots of variety.

You should play it before you can really say how good or bad it is. I think its a good game but not anything as good as GTA. And making a map that over the top big can be cool at times, like sky diving from really high up and the sense of scale when flying planes, but most of the time it just makes commutes tedious because the driving isn't as good and there's nothing good to listen too. With the scale of the game as big as it is, trust me you'll be grateful for that grappling hook, the game is unplayable without it.

 

And the reason why GTA V will be much smaller is because JC2 is "randomly" generated, its the same everytime but the actual game was built based on randomly generated areas, while Rockstar designs and builds every part of the map, thinking about how it could be fun to drive through.

Personally I have no issues with taking my time driving through a map.

 

At the moment I am playing Far Cry 3 and I have used fast travel ONCE at the very start of the game after it instructed me to do so.

 

I prefer to make my own way around the map, I did the same with RDR and Skyrim. I dislike fast travel that has been introduced into modern games, also dislike autosave but that is irrelevant really.

 

I actually WANT to play in a game world as large as JC2, but the actual mechanics of JC2 are what put me off it.

 

The game world itself looks amazing and I just wish RockStar would make a GTA game set in a huge world like JC2.

I am kind of the same, sometimes I think 'I feel like having a road trip across Just Cause 2' and it seems like a really good idea. The you actually do it, and it is a soul destroying experience. It is nice to see the mountains and desert and (samey) jungle and city but having only those nails-on-a-chalkboard engine sounds to listen to, passing the same cars every few seconds, driving past a forest or jungle looks like the same few square meters and loads of mirrors side by side. Night goes by about 3x faster than day, which is stupid. The navigation system is broken and will have you driving in circles, and if you slip of the road because of the god awful handling your vehicle will blow up at the slightest touch.

Rant over. It's not as good as it sounds. Far Cry 3 is much more detailed, hence it is better.

[JonRenemy]

Yeah, if JC2 had the details of Far Cry 3 but it was a third person game, then it woulda been a lot better.

JC2 IS still fun as I said, but it's definitely not a GTA game and I only ever want a GTA game that big if they can make it as good as a GTA game.

[Fail_At_GTA]

The JC2 map has no variation. Every tree looks the same, every building looks the same, every village looks the same. You could show me a screenshot of JC2 and I wouldn't know where it is, even though I'm 99.8% complete (the airport glitched >.>) but if you do the same for a game like GTA IV, I would know exactly where it is because its a unique area and I wouldn't get confused. Perhaps the tall building in northern Algonquin would get confusing but that is extremely minor.

 

Anyway, this topic is getting extremely derailed.

[ChillyPhilly]

I wonder if we can expect Chiliad to be as tall as the desert mountain in Just Cause 2, because that thing was huge.

It was, and still not the highest point.

Yeah, but the highest one on the mountains was pretty bad for base jumping, whereas the south slope of the desert one was pretty much a sheer drop all the way to sea level . I think it was in the 1.5-2km range, height wise. I suppose there is no way to calculate how large the two mountains in GTAV are.

We could calculate a rough height if we can establish their shadows and the time of day.

[JoseGrapinino]

34.074547, -118.547652

1722 Chastain Pkwy E‎

Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, Pacific Palisades, CA 90272

 

Is this house the inspiration for Michael's?

 

Check out the pink truck at 1738 btw

 

 

Might have mixed in a little 1787 Chastain Parkway East as well

^looks like Trevor was parked out front visiting

[The Hate]

Here are all images of the rivers we've seen so far and their flow.

This next screen is the same area from a different angle

 

I think all of them flow out of the Alamo and the Alamo gets its water from the runoff of nearby mountains. If I'm right, then judging by the waterfall in the 3rd screen the Alamo must be at least a hundred feet or so above sea level. However, if the dam's and waterfall's (in the 3rd screen shot) source is not the Alamo (because the Alamo is too low above sea level and they are higher) then there must be another lake that is quite high above sea level.

 

 

The reason we know the Alamo isn't feeding the dam is that poking your head over the vinewood hills gives you a good clear view of the lake.

 

 

Is this the screenshot you are referring to? If so, I don't see a lake there, maybe a river but no lake. I see a cactus and some rocks but it's too foggy to tell.

 

Edited June 6, 2013 by The Hate

[Redwood Cigarettes]

34.074547, -118.547652

1722 Chastain Pkwy E‎

Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, Pacific Palisades, CA 90272

 

Is this house the inspiration for Michael's?

 

Check out the pink truck at 1738 btw

 

 

Might have mixed in a little 1787 Chastain Parkway East as well

^looks like Trevor was parked out front visiting

I compiled an image of comparisons to save everyone time:

[zombie elvis]

 

Is this the screenshot you are referring to? If so, I don't see a lake there, maybe a river but no lake. I see a cactus and some rocks but it's too foggy to tell.

 

That's what I used to say to people! But if you look at the ridge of 3 long hills, you see the same thing from the alamo picture you posted above it, but from the opposite side.

 

Equalised contrast of that range:

Edited June 6, 2013 by zombie elvis

[gonnaenodaethat]

 

That low hill range looks very similar, and are probably a homage, to the real life Pentland Hills which are situated to the South West of Edinburgh.

 

 

R* previously included the Forth Rail & Road bridges in GTA SA so it seems they are continuing the trend of including Scottish locales in V.

Edited June 6, 2013 by gonnaenodaethat

[Kaster]

dont know if you made this map, with five rdr put together. If so, i think you should only count the playable area and not the whole map.

Yes I did,

 

I made a new calc and the map would be 236,5 square kms or 91.31 square miles, smaller than the last I posted. Because 1.06 IN GAME RDR KMS = 0.96 JC2 IN GAME KMS = 1.52 GTA IV IN GAME KMS

 

For me the map of RDR is the whole map, including unplayable areas R* never talked about this and in RDR the unplayable area is very important part of the map, is not plain water or void space, it is non sense to exclude unplayable areas, also GTA V will be a fully playable Island with jetfights, with this its needs a lot of space and is very balanced compared to my JC2 dimensions.

 

 

 

 

[omawnakw]

Not sure if this version discussed. I looked at the blimp promo shot again and I suddenly thought, if that race track is Hollywood Park IRL, what if that signature is not 'GAS NC', but ''CASINO'?

(click on image)

Edited July 23, 2013 by omawnakw

[zombie elvis]

Not sure if this version discussed. I looked at the blimp promo shot again and I suddenly thought, if that race track is Hollywood Park IRL, what if that signature is not 'GAS NC', but ''CASINO'?

Yeah I did bring that up somewhere but not sure if anyone replied.

[nwbpro]

Hi

 

I need your help.

 

I decided not to do the whole map of GTAV because it's too much guess work, so I concentrated just on Sandy Shores where we have many angle options.

 

From the photos available, I have tried to recreate a map of Sandy Shores and the surrondings in the best possible way.

 

This is the first version. I hope with your comments I can make this 100% accurate.

 

Many thanks.

 

Edited June 6, 2013 by nwbpro

[Maglev]

 

34.074547, -118.547652

1722 Chastain Pkwy E‎

Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, Pacific Palisades, CA 90272

 

Is this house the inspiration for Michael's?

 

Check out the pink truck at 1738 btw

 

 

Might have mixed in a little 1787 Chastain Parkway East as well

^looks like Trevor was parked out front visiting

I compiled an image of comparisons to save everyone time:

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y83/Reloa...zpsadac6066.jpg

Nice find!

Could be coincidence but they could have used it as an example.

 

Imagine your own house featuring as a main building in a video game

[omawnakw]

 

Not sure if this version discussed. I looked at the blimp promo shot again and I suddenly thought, if that race track is Hollywood Park IRL, what if that signature is not  'GAS NC', but ''CASINO'?

Yeah I did bring that up somewhere but not sure if anyone replied.

Oh, it's good you're of the same opinion.

Here is another view from Michael trailer:

 

@nwbpro, i think Sandy Shores is where Fido put it on the map. The mountain to the left of where you placed it looks too close in this shot

That's why I do not believe we see Sandy Shores in it. But, I could be wrong. Your map looks nice though.

 

UPDATE: you need to fix the Alamo sea (Why Almo?)

and why do you post so enormous image, do you have a 30' display? Looks pretty out-of-the-border with my 24'

Here I made clickable re-size for you (just copy it to your post and delete that outrage):

 

[img=http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/7015/nwprosandyshoresv1small.jpg]

 

 

 

UPDATE2: guys, let's stop to post about the 'cactus' in the sea it's ridiculous, that thingie is just a cell tower:

Edited June 6, 2013 by omawnakw

[lazloisdavrock]

Sign "Vinewood" will be visible from any corner of the city.