Jump to content

Tell me whats Wrong with just having Southern Cali


skillz7855

Recommended Posts

What really wrong with having a huge detailed Southern California(South San Andreas) when rockstar said its going to be there biggest most detailed city they have ever done. Since now they have are revamping actual locations of cities now more detailed and close to real life.It will take awhile to even finish a map like that since they would have to do a huge Bay Area from Northern Cali that could take awhile. Also Vegas too will take even longer that will game probably would come out Next Gen if those console can even take all that.So what I'm saying is they did the right move by doing a huge southern cali.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The_Mario_Man

Many people are stuck in the III era mindset, so they think that the map will be a direct copy/paste of 2004's San Andreas, only with San Fierro and Venturas cropped out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

walkingsickness

 

What really wrong with having a huge detailed Southern California(South San Andreas) when rockstar said its going to be there biggest most detailed city they have ever done. Since now they have are revamping actual locations of cities now more detailed and close to real life.It will take awhile to even finish a map like that since they would have to do a huge Bay Area from Northern Cali that could take awhile. Also Vegas too will take even longer that will game probably would come out Next Gen if those console can even take all that.So what I'm saying is they did the right move by doing a huge southern cali.

Nothing is wrong with it.

 

I think people are not thinking bigger and better, thats all

 

That being said...I think SF and LV will be in it..

Edited by walkingsickness
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people are stuck in the III era mindset, so they think that the map will be a direct copy/paste of 2004's San Andreas, only with San Fierro and Venturas cropped out.

I wish people understood that we aren't going back to the same Los Santos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

leik oh em jeez!

Many people feel limited by having only one city. It takes away from the game realism when you can't leave town and go somewhere else for a while. I personally loved the variety in San Andreas. sometimes I'd enjoy being in San Fierro, and sometimes I'd rather stay at the Air Strip. Multiple cities also gave the highways and aircraft reason to be in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

shortyduwaaap
What really wrong with having a huge detailed Southern California(South San Andreas) when rockstar said its going to be there biggest most detailed city they have ever done. Since now they have are revamping actual locations of cities now more detailed and close to real life.It will take awhile to even finish a map like that since they would have to do a huge Bay Area from Northern Cali that could take awhile. Also Vegas too will take even longer that will game probably would come out Next Gen if those console can even take all that.So what I'm saying is they did the right move by doing a huge southern cali.

Nothing is wrong with it.

 

I think people are not thinking bigger and better, thats all

 

That being said...I think SF and LV will be in it..

bigger and better would be doing a city that hasn't been done...

 

what if Rock* kept doing NY, MIA, LA, NY, LA... MIA, LA, NY... blah blah blah... DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people are stuck in the III era mindset, so they think that the map will be a direct copy/paste of 2004's San Andreas, only with San Fierro and Venturas cropped out.

I wish people understood that we aren't going back to the same Los Santos

cookie.gifcookie.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, what about those like me who liked SF or LV better than LS in SA? It feels like they're giving us SA back but without our favourite parts. They can recreate LS and Southern California as awesome as they can, it won't compensate for the loss of two great cities that could perfectly be on the map.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are just afraid of change, that's the main problem.

Sometimes things have to change in order for a better outcome, I personally have no problem with it what so ever so long as it doesn't become a disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people feel limited by having only one city. It takes away from the game realism when you can't leave town and go somewhere else for a while. I personally loved the variety in San Andreas. sometimes I'd enjoy being in San Fierro, and sometimes I'd rather stay at the Air Strip. Multiple cities also gave the highways and aircraft reason to be in the game.

Southern California has multiple cities!

user posted image

San Diego is just below the map. I'm not saying they're gonna have all of that, but SoCal is huge and there is a lot they can do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CryptReaperDorian

A million other games have already made a very detailed or a scaled (one of realistic size) Los Angeles. The same goes for Las Vegas. I really think the game needs to have multiple cities so it doesn't seem like a slightly better remake of a million older games. I'd say this is where GTA SA did great since you were able to travel to other cities if you got bored of just one city. Hell, you didn't even need to be in a city!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people feel limited by having only one city. It takes away from the game realism when you can't leave town and go somewhere else for a while. I personally loved the variety in San Andreas. sometimes I'd enjoy being in San Fierro, and sometimes I'd rather stay at the Air Strip. Multiple cities also gave the highways and aircraft reason to be in the game.

They said southern Cali do you not understand how big that is plus country and desert side and possibly San Diego that give it a reason to have highways and planes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people are stuck in the III era mindset, so they think that the map will be a direct copy/paste of 2004's San Andreas, only with San Fierro and Venturas cropped out.

Pretty much.

 

"I can't wait to see Grove St! Maybe CJ will be there."

 

"Oh look, there's Mt. Chiliad in the trailer.."

 

People seem to be expecting GTA: San Andreas 2.

Sent from my ayePhone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The_Mario_Man

Well. I guess I'll toss my theory in. Perhaps the next 2 games in the "V" era will be based on San Fransico and Las Vegas, and their respective surroundings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

walkingsickness
What really wrong with having a huge detailed Southern California(South San Andreas) when rockstar said its going to be there biggest most detailed city they have ever done. Since now they have are revamping actual locations of cities now more detailed and close to real life.It will take awhile to even finish a map like that since they would have to do a huge Bay Area from Northern Cali that could take awhile. Also Vegas too will take even longer that will game probably would come out Next Gen if those console can even take all that.So what I'm saying is they did the right move by doing a huge southern cali.

Nothing is wrong with it.

 

I think people are not thinking bigger and better, thats all

 

That being said...I think SF and LV will be in it..

bigger and better would be doing a city that hasn't been done...

 

what if Rock* kept doing NY, MIA, LA, NY, LA... MIA, LA, NY... blah blah blah... DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT!!!!!

GTA IV wasn't bigger and better than GTA III?

 

In the literal sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people feel limited by having only one city. It takes away from the game realism when you can't leave town and go somewhere else for a while. I personally loved the variety in San Andreas. sometimes I'd enjoy being in San Fierro, and sometimes I'd rather stay at the Air Strip. Multiple cities also gave the highways and aircraft reason to be in the game.

They said southern Cali do you not understand how big that is plus country and desert side and possibly San Diego that give it a reason to have highways and planes.

these guys keep bringing up san diego, san diego is a really wack choice for a video game city. i'd prefer just los santos with outlaying towns to los santos AND san diego, it's not really a stand alone place, especially in a video game setting. however, i'm one of those people that's hoping that LV and SF return, if they don't i'll probably still enjoy the game, but there's not enough evidence right now for me to completely rule them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A million other games have already made a very detailed or a scaled (one of realistic size) Los Angeles. The same goes for Las Vegas. I really think the game needs to have multiple cities so it doesn't seem like a slightly better remake of a million older games. I'd say this is where GTA SA did great since you were able to travel to other cities if you got bored of just one city. Hell, you didn't even need to be in a city!

and how many of them where open world and freedom like GTA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people are stuck in the III era mindset, so they think that the map will be a direct copy/paste of 2004's San Andreas, only with San Fierro and Venturas cropped out.

Exactly! They don't realize that there's more to Los Angeles than what we saw in the III era.

user posted image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's technically impossible to have all three big cities so they had to drop SF and LV out.

A lot of people are expecting LS to be 3 times the size of LC. If that's correct, it's only logical that can make three cities the size of LC (and LC was really big and well detailed, so no problem)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finn 7 five 11
People are just afraid of change, that's the main problem.

Sometimes things have to change in order for a better outcome, I personally have no problem with it what so ever so long as it doesn't become a disappointment.

Yep, word up, i sam still thinking there will be more than one city, or at least a largish town somewhere, but i am not overly fussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i don't think these people have played SA in a while either. I tried playing it last night, just exploring places but by now the wow-factor has worn off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont care if SF and LV aren't in it. Im fine with just Los Santos and some cool country on the side

Hello. I am one of the last grove street warriors alive and on the streets. I've seen all my homies get locked up for life and I saw my closest homies get layed out. Grove for life

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine its 3 cities, but its still 1 huge map! i don't see whats wrong with having a realy big map. its like having 3 cookies mashed into a big orgasmic cookie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's technically impossible to have all three big cities so they had to drop SF and LV out.

A lot of people are expecting LS to be 3 times the size of LC. If that's correct, it's only logical that can make three cities the size of LC (and LC was really big and well detailed, so no problem)

But they would have to capture the Bay area since there making the game look closer to real life. If they just have one city of the bay area like they did in the frist SA that would place would look very empty compared to real life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ppl need 2 be patient - wait 2 see the neXt FEW trailers - & stop complaining & jumping 2 so many speculated conclusions of what is or isnt going 2 be in the game. ppl are getting e-violent & disrespectful over a game no one has played!?!

 

unless you work 4 rockstar - you know nothing!

 

eXcited 4 the game's eXistence. eXcited 4 whatever it contains whether its one city or one block. excited 2 view all of the trailers.

 

this is a NEW era with a NEW game breaking NEW ground while utiliZing NEW technology. rockstar has always been consistent in giving ME what i want in gta. personally im fine with los santos & amaZing graphics. ive waited 7 years.

 

why be stuck in the past?

 

[/thevoiceofreason]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a bit disapointed with the lack of extra cities (if they arent any) but after looking into whats in South Cali, im confident it could be much bigger/better than SA was (and I love SA)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

walkingsickness

Also...does anyone remember the first San Andreas trailer?

 

Did you see any of LV or SF in it??

 

Lets not jump to conclusions about what WE DONT KNOW

because we are all talking as if we know the facts and we don't

know sh*t

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.