How are some of you so sure?

[StalinBballin]

^ This.

 

L.A. Noire took 3 discs on 360 because of the facial recognition data. The same map is on all 3 discs. GTAV will be one disc for all platforms, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say the PS3 version will look immensely better compared to the 360.

[Gtaghost22]

There's nothing to say that the additional two cities for sure won't appear in the game, it's just that we can't count on it given the uncertainty about appropriate compression algorithms to use with the Xbox 360's dated DVD-DATA storage medium.

Perfect post

[btbwuh]

Tell me this then: why would they keep it a secret? It seems odd to believe that R* would purposely keep information away from us just to f*ck with us. I don't quite know how they think (like pretty much everyone else) so I honestly don't know; but I'D like to think they would at least tell us the truth instead of awkward pricks, and I hope I'm damn right

[theworldfamous]

It's not a defensive mechanism, it's just what it is. Doing three cities in the size and detail required is just a huge waste of money and effort.

 

And 3 cities? What does that mean. If that means hugely scaled down cities with a few cars driving around here and there, it doesn't feel like a city to me. Even IV became smallish after a while. And map size is overrated anyway. I want density. I'm happy to trade 2 cities for more interiors, shops, activities, back alleys, interesting tunnels alleys and shortcuts, cool set pieces.. scenes you'd expect to find in a city and of course livelier streets.

[Mr.Moffat]

They wouldn't just say SF and LV aren't included in the game. That's not very good marketing.

This.

 

Making a press release about V taking place in southern cali is a smart way of saying SF and LV aren't in the game, and I personally can't think of another way to do that without giving a negative spin to the press release.

finally some common sense prevailing, by the op's logig Vice city and belgium might be in the game because the press release did'nt say they were'nt after.

 

IM 100% sure that LS will be the one major city in V with perhaps one or two smaller cities on the map (same as how some of new jearsy was in iv yes gtaIVhad two cities!)

 

This is a good way of going I think, a city like San diego prob would'nt be as iconic to hold a gta game on its own but by having a mini version along side LS works best

 

Anyway im glad LV and SF are'nt going to be there, they would be much more suited to their owen game that plays to the cities strengths, IN the old SA they were just there, I felt they had no real character or atmosphere

[MrcTOtheJ]

but I've always read it as a nicer way of saying LS is the only city without upsetting people in the process.

Couldn't have said it better my self, it's just a nice way of saying it, as a opposed to "LS is the only major city, so don't ask," good marketing, both telling it how it is, and doing so nicely.

[Nebby]

 

Trailer 2 will address this.  Don't worry.

This.

 

Also - when Rockstar* say's "re-imagined" their definitely hiding something considering they said they weren't going to stop developing the game until they've recreated the "world outside"... Not to mention Dan Houser (maybe deliberately to keep the hype going) said that he can't go any further into detail or else he'll be dragged through his office by barb wire...

 

Seem's a bit suspicious to me.

[Jewstinian]

We're so sure because they said Los Santos and the surround countryside. I'm thinking that it will be the countryside which will then be surrounded by a never ending desert and on the other side is the city surrounded by a never ending ocean.

 

And there probably will be two discs, one for Multiplayer, one for Singleplayer.

 

As canttakemyid said, Trailer 2 will address this.

[Finn 7 five 11]

Going by your logic, Rockstar never said New York and London were not in game so that means they must be right?

[Inf3rn0]

I just don't understand why they haven't just said SF and LV aren't in the game to please all the SA fans who keep asking.

 

Also, the first trailer for SA only showed LS. They wouldn't have needed to say what cities were in the game, because no one knew that there were 3 cities in the state of SA at the time. Trailer 2 will clear all of this up I'm sure, i just don't get it.

 

Also, saying it's only in southern Cali doesn't mean anything, because SA is R*'s version of Cali.

 

GTA San Andreas map by hapokas112, on Flickr

 

As you can see, LS and SF are both at least partially in Southern SA.

 

My issue isn't with map size, or even the number of cities. I just don't want to completely rule out the other 2 cities when there is no proof from R* that they are not in the game.

 

 

 

Just for comparison, a picture of all the GTA maps.

[Mr.Moffat]

I just don't understand why they haven't just said SF and LV aren't in the game to please all the SA fans who keep asking.

 

Also, the first trailer for SA only showed LS. They wouldn't have needed to say what cities were in the game, because no one knew that there were 3 cities in the state of SA at the time. Trailer 2 will clear all of this up I'm sure, i just don't get it.

 

Also, saying it's only in southern Cali doesn't mean anything, because SA is R*'s version of Cali.

 

GTA San Andreas map by hapokas112, on Flickr

 

As you can see, LS and SF are both at least partially in Southern SA.

 

My issue isn't with map size, or even the number of cities. I just don't want to completely rule out the other 2 cities when there is no proof from R* that they are not in the game.

 

 

 

Just for comparison, a picture of all the GTA maps.

Im pretty sure the 3 cities where confirmnd along with their names long before the 1st SA trailer was released

[Inf3rn0]

 

Im pretty sure the 3 cities where confirmnd along with their names long before the 1st SA trailer was released

Actually, I think you're right. My bad. But the point still stands that there is no proof one way or the other, so don't say they definitely are not going to be in GTA V.

[LotusRIP]

I'd like people who are concerned about map size or general play area size to watch this video.

 

 

 

After watching this, ask yourself. Are you still worried about the map being too small?

It wasn't that big in San Andreas... What makes you think it ont be much bigger but with more detail? Hate it when people come around here comparing V to real life city. It's only a videogame. They cant work miracles and almost any city you can think of is already bigger than any game map.

[Finn 7 five 11]

I'd like people who are concerned about map size or general play area size to watch this video.

 

 

 

After watching this, ask yourself. Are you still worried about the map being too small?

It wasn't that big in San Andreas... What makes you think it ont be much bigger but with more detail? Hate it when people come around here comparing V to real life city. It's only a videogame. They cant work miracles and almost any city you can think of is already bigger than any game map.

COmparing to real life is silly like you said.

But his point is just because it is one city, that does not mean it will be small in anyway.

[HydraulicWaRiOr]

Heed the knowledge of the forum psychics, I'm sure they know more than everyone like they assert.

 

[supreme]

[Triple Vacuum Seal]

LS can be the only city and make for an epic game; but the real question is do people really think that R* is silly enough to make an open world crime game that traditionally includes multiple map sections (regardless of the number of cities on it) and ignore the main source of LA's drug activity which is in turn the main source of its criminal activity?....The Border and traffic routes through San Diego

 

*Sorry to sound like a broken record but the OP is right to ask how people are so "SURE".

Edited May 1, 2012 by canttakemyid

[MrcTOtheJ]

I can see a San Diego based City making it in, at a size a bit bigger than Alderny in IV, since it meets the southern California requirements, and would make an interesting area IMO.

 

Not to mention that is where most of the drugs that are delt with in LA come though after Mexico.

[Death2Drugs]

Though I would love to see San Fierro and Las Venturas again, it seems unlikely they'll re-appear again without creating an awkward map like they did in San Andreas. Unless they're doing a HUGE California-Nevada state, it's not likely. I do believe we'll see another city. I will agree people are instantly sure that it's just "Los Santos and surrounding countryside". Remember the game takes place in Southern California. We could see San Diego and Tijuana being replicated and many smaller towns based on Ventura, Bakersfield, Simi Valley, Oceanside, Mexicali, San Bernardino, etc. Whether the game will have SF/LV or not, the map will be HUGE.

[HydraulicWaRiOr]

Though I would love to see San Fierro and Las Venturas again, it seems unlikely they'll re-appear again without creating an awkward map like they did in San Andreas. Unless they're doing a HUGE California-Nevada state, it's not likely. I do believe we'll see another city. I will agree people are instantly sure that it's just "Los Santos and surrounding countryside". Remember the game takes place in Southern California. We could see San Diego and Tijuana being replicated and many smaller towns based on Ventura, Bakersfield, Simi Valley, Oceanside, Mexicali, San Bernardino, etc. Whether the game will have SF/LV or not, the map will be HUGE.

Technically, it's a reimagined Southern California, so in theory, they could put anything from Phoenix to New Delhi in GTA V. It's just a matter of realism I guess.

 

[supreme]

[jnzooger]

I'd like people who are concerned about map size or general play area size to watch this video.

 

 

 

After watching this, ask yourself. Are you still worried about the map being too small?

It wasn't that big in San Andreas... What makes you think it ont be much bigger but with more detail? Hate it when people come around here comparing V to real life city. It's only a videogame. They cant work miracles and almost any city you can think of is already bigger than any game map.

COmparing to real life is silly like you said.

But his point is just because it is one city, that does not mean it will be small in anyway.

I think he was trying to point out that there are more than one city down there, and they are all connected, what you call one city may not be just one city. (And no, I'm not talking about the districts like Hollywood and Watts.)

[John The Grudge]

Rockstar isn't the riddler. They said Southern California so that's what they mean. No SF and no LV. This isn't a sherlock holmes movie. They haven't left you a puzzle to figure out. It's not cryptic.

 

Saying "they didn't say it wasn't in" is a stupid and childish argument. They didn't say a lot of things.

[Mister Pink]

 

They assume people know Los Santos means Los Angeles but they avoided saying San Andreas even though that's still the state that Los Santos is in. They said Southern California deliberately to tell you GTA V will not include the Northern California and Nevada parts of San Andreas.

This.

 

I mean by the sounds of what we have, its sounds realistic, the size, given the space on an Xbox disc. 3 large cities, representative of the general scale of HD GTA cities seems out of the question with proportionate distance between cities.

 

@Inferno: The reason they don't say what's not in the game is because that's negative. Simple. Rockstar want to tell you what's IN the game, not what it doesn't have. Simple marketing.

Edited May 1, 2012 by ThePinkFloydSound

[jnzooger]

They assume people know Los Santos means Los Angeles but they avoided saying San Andreas even though that's still the state that Los Santos is in. They said Southern California deliberately to tell you GTA V will not include the Northern California and Nevada parts of San Andreas.

This.

 

I mean by the sounds of what we have, its sounds realistic, the size, given the space on an Xbox disc. 3 large cities, representative of the general scale of HD GTA cities seems out of the question with proportionate distance between cities.

 

@Inferno: The reason they don't say what's not in the game is because that's negative. Simple. Rockstar want to tell you what's IN the game, not what it doesn't have. Simple marketing.

Exactly, they confirm that Los Santos is in, but they can't confirm the names of the other cities/towns included yet. However, they can confirm that none of those included cities/towns are outside of the Southern California area.

 

It is really that simple.

[Vormek]

Lol @ people saying "They never said LV and SF won't be in the game". That's like saying "They never said that they won't make Titanic 2 so we can safely assume Titanic 2 will be in production soon. Press release says southern california, what more do you want? However, I do have a feeling that Los Santos won't be the only city in the game. Maybe some other small cities/towns will be featured in the game, but it sure as sh** won't be LV or SF.

[skullking1234]

It seems like some of the members here are convinced that it's only going to be LS. Here's what R* said:

 

"Developed by series creator Rockstar North, Grand Theft Auto V heads to the city of Los Santos and surrounding hills, countryside and beaches in the largest and most ambitious game Rockstar has yet created."

 

No where in this statement does it say that LV and SF will NOT be in the game. They only say that LS WILL be in the game.

 

"A bold new direction in open-world freedom, storytelling, mission-based gameplay and online multiplayer, Grand Theft Auto V focuses on the pursuit of the almighty dollar in a re-imagined, present day Southern California."

 

Now this could be taken to say that LV will not be in the game as it is only 'a re-imagined, present day Southern California.' But it says re-imagined. What exactly does this mean? No one knows yet. But this could mean they included LV in the game as re-imagined means they can do whatever the f*ck they want.

 

I guess my point is, what makes you so sure that it will ONLY be LS?

No theres going to be ls might a big citys some hills and maybe desert?

[jnzooger]

Lol @ people saying "They never said LV and SF won't be in the game". That's like saying "They never said that they won't make Titanic 2 so we can safely assume Titanic 2 will be in production soon. Press release says southern california, what more do you want? However, I do have a feeling that Los Santos won't be the only city in the game. Maybe some other small cities/towns will be featured in the game, but it sure as sh** won't be LV or SF.

Actually, they did say they are making Titanic 2.

[vanni]

Not this again

Right? Jesus....

[Racecarlock]

I'd like people who are concerned about map size or general play area size to watch this video.

 

 

 

After watching this, ask yourself. Are you still worried about the map being too small?

It wasn't that big in San Andreas... What makes you think it ont be much bigger but with more detail? Hate it when people come around here comparing V to real life city. It's only a videogame. They cant work miracles and almost any city you can think of is already bigger than any game map.

GTA III's liberty city wasn't that big either, but GTA IV made it huge. Do you really think that LS in GTA V would be the same size as it was in GTA SA? And if so, why?