Map Size Thread

[kesta195]

If they can fit that many large houses in that tiny area then I'm hardly concerned about the ghetto.

[MrP4nc4ke]

Countryside in SA justified only as "distance" between cities..? Give me a break. Certainly people have different tastes, but WTF? Most of the fun in SA was always outside city limits for me.

 

The map of GTAV seems near perfect with lots of variation (hope we get some snow in the mountains even if it would be a little unrealistic). I have never been a fan of big city maps anyway. Never even learned IV's Liberty City by heart. Too monotonous.

 

However, I can see why some people are disappointed in the size of LS. It does not seem that big compared to the rest of the map (which we haven't really seen though).

 

 

 

[The Scottish Guy]

If they can fit that many large houses...

To be fair, there isn't that many houses. It's only really one street with two cul de sacs, and a lake.

 

 

...in that tiny area then I'm hardly concerned about the ghetto.

 

I don't really see that area being small in regards to the whole city map. And it appears to be the only suburban area, which is pretty ridiculous.

[Ferocious Banger]

 

If they can fit that many large houses in that tiny area then I'm hardly concerned about the ghetto.

I believe that you're in my group - natural. So, let me say this hoping that I won't get lambasted:

 

Zoom in as much as you can in that picture with the blimp; just do that and tell me that the city "looks" small.

 

I like how it stretches. That is the closest ( zoomed ) we can get to "feel" the size.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Ferocious Banger

[GTAaLEX117]

I don't really see that area being small in regards to the whole city map. And it appears to be the only suburban area, which is pretty ridiculous.

I think there's also the area underneath the observatory, on the other hillside.

[kesta195]

If they can fit that many large houses in that tiny area then I'm hardly concerned about the ghetto.

I believe that you're in my group - natural. So, let me say this hoping that I won't get lambasted:

 

Zoom in as much as you can in that picture with the blimp; just do that and tell me that the city "looks" small.

At face value the city looks kind of small from the blimp pic, it requires a bit of thought to realise this screen is yet again a bit misleading. The eastern side of the river here looks to equate to the western side, even though we can clearly see from the map that this region is just a small sliver of the full city..

 

@The Scottish Guy look really closely. Apart from the cul-de-sac there are many large houses lining the edge of the lake and a large clump of them to the right.

[The Scottish Guy]

If they can fit that many large houses in that tiny area then I'm hardly concerned about the ghetto.

I believe that you're in my group - natural. So, let me say this hoping that I won't get lambasted:

 

Zoom in as much as you can in that picture with the blimp; just do that and tell me that the city "looks" small.

But why the need to zoom when you can clearly see the size of the houses and pathways? It's pretty clear to get an estimate of how far away things are from that minute suburban area, and downtown looks like a stones throw away.

[kesta195]

 

If they can fit that many large houses in that tiny area then I'm hardly concerned about the ghetto.

I believe that you're in my group - natural. So, let me say this hoping that I won't get lambasted:

 

Zoom in as much as you can in that picture with the blimp; just do that and tell me that the city "looks" small.

But why the need to zoom when you can clearly see the size of the houses and pathways? It's pretty clear to get an estimate of how far away things are from that minute suburban area, and downtown looks like a stones throw away.

So does the coast, if you look to the background, but relative to downtown from this area it should look much further away than that.

 

EDIT: Look here, downtown looks a lot further away from the ground, at least in my opinion. Imagine the Chrysler building from IV and put it where US Bank is.

Edited May 25, 2013 by kesta195

[Ferocious Banger]

 

If they can fit that many large houses in that tiny area then I'm hardly concerned about the ghetto.

I believe that you're in my group - natural. So, let me say this hoping that I won't get lambasted:

 

Zoom in as much as you can in that picture with the blimp; just do that and tell me that the city "looks" small.

But why the need to zoom when you can clearly see the size of the houses and pathways? It's pretty clear to get an estimate of how far away things are from that minute suburban area, and downtown looks like a stones throw away.

Because that peerspective- the zoomed in perspective- is closer to the ground up view than anything else; And ground up view is what we eventually are going to play with in the most.

 

Not to mention the fact that Rockstar have most certainly elongated the destinations between any "X" and any "Y" - this will contribute to the "sense of sprawl " too.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Ferocious Banger

[The Scottish Guy]

 

I don't really see that area being small in regards to the whole city map. And it appears to be the only suburban area, which is pretty ridiculous.

I think there's also the area underneath the observatory, on the other hillside.

Of course, but they are more upper class rich neighbourhoods. There should be much, much more middle class and ghetto areas. This is, after all, a re-imagined Los Angeles, no?

 

 

@The Scottish Guy look really closely. Apart from the cul-de-sac there are many large houses lining the edge of the lake and a large clump of them to the right.

 

Fair enough, but even so, how can you be satisfied with this? Hell, even the urban area of north Alderney looked more 'sprawling' than this!

 

 

EDIT: Look here, downtown looks a lot further away from the ground

 

Yeah, I've been meaning to bring up that pic ever since the 'blimp' screen was released the other day. R* is sure f*cking with my perceptions atm with these screens. In the blimp pic, downtown looks nowhere near as far away as it does in the lakeside screen, regardless of elevation. I just hope they didn't purposely stretch that shot.

 

 

Because that peerspective- the zoomed in perspective- is closer to the ground up view than anything else; And ground up view is what we eventually are going to play with as the most.

 

Yeah, I understand that, but it still doesn't change the fact I can clearly see the size of those houses/the width of the freeway at the downtown point, and how the distance looks between the two areas, and how long it would take to drive along that freeway.

Edited May 25, 2013 by The Scottish Guy

[Deffpony]

I will be honest with you. While I hoped for LS to be bigger the all of LC Im actually not as disappointed as I thought I would be. There is still hope.

 

First of all, I never even played in Alderney in IV so I think the size is actually ok.

 

Second, Im more so hoping that the quality of the city is much better than IV. If LS was just the size of Algonquin I would be happy if there was ALOT more to do within it. Alot more interiors, businesses, minigames, side missions, random people/events.

 

I hope LS is packed with importance. If so, the size wont matter

[Sunrise Driver]

So LS is only as big as LC + Alderney and Blaine County = size of RDR2 + GTASA?

 

Why do we need so much countryside?

[73duster]

78% of fans, PLUS the vast majority of professional game reviewers have been very happy about the overall map. Only here will a measly 22% of dissatisfied fans be enough o cause such a stir over nothing. We used to get people complaining that Liberty City was too much city, and people wanted a countryside to bring variety. This was San Andreas biggest asset, and with GTAV, we get a much larger modern version of San Andreas.

It is NOT meant to be a carbon copy of L.A., or San Andreas. We are getting almost EVERYTHING we wanted like:

Planes

countryside

large map

customization

property purchases

As well as a ton of new stuff like:

multiple protagonists

explorable ocean

tons of side activities

more use for money

No matter what happens, there will always be a small group of complainers with ridiculous expectations. I don't have a problem with people saying "it would have been nicer if....", but at some point, logic has to kick in.

These games cost a lot of money and time to produce, and are pushing the limits of current gen consoles. Yet, none of these facts matter to complainers who don't understand that there is a limit to how much a developer can do under these circumstances. Furthermore, the other massive issue that these complainers are ignoring is that at some point, it simply doesn't PAY to spend so many resources on a product. They will have to sell in record numbers just to break EVEN! That's right! I DARED to bring up another inconvenient truth, PROFITS! The whiners don't care about the fact that this is a BUSINESS, and Rockstar is a BUSINESS.

In spite of the massive work and expense involved, Rockstar didn't skimp on anything. 78% of fans think the map is already looking REVOLUTIONARY in terms of detail, size and content combined.

 

The game is worth far more than the $60 pricetag, and the fact that 22% of "fans" don't see that isn't going to change that.

[AceHigh11]

@73duster:

Not all complaints are ridiculous. And it would be pretty boring if nobody complained at all.

I can understand how some people don't like the size of LS looking at the blueprint map.

 

PS: I can't wait to play GTA V btw, if I look at all the info we know about this game, it's gonna be epic. I think most of that 22% that voted 'no' on that poll, will feel the same way.

Edited May 25, 2013 by AceHigh11

[SuccessPastaTime]

Aww the poor General.  You must honestly wake up everyday and go to sleep with arguing a forum thread on your mind.. To post as much as you do on this subject it must never leave your mind. It seems to consume you. For this reason I feel sorry for you, I honestly do .  It's a free country. (or supposed to be anyways) So argue on my friend, I think your having an impact.   

 

Also posting something twice isn't spamming, I was just pointing out the fact their are better things to discuss. Thats my opinion...

 

Just because I can see that this tread isn't accomplishing anything doesn't mean I have to leave, just as you argue that just because you believe the city is too small doesn't mean you shouldn't get the game... Also you seem to be taking this much more personally than most people, maybe you should evaluate your motives...  I can say your persistence is epic, if nothing else

@ Uber

 

Thanks for concern, but you don't need to worry about me bro. Firstly I enjoy debates and arguments about stuff that interests me a great deal - in this case, GTA. Secondly, I work in a job that allows me to kill great deal of time to engage in online discussions while I work. Thirdly, I find this thread entertaining as well as one that interests me. Fourthly, I do not take all of this too seriously as much as you seem to think I do. Believe me, I do other nice and constructive things that occupy my time, and that includes gettin' with some sexy b*tches, one I'm tappin' now is actually Bajan, right from your island. Anyway, why does my major involvement with this thread concern you? You don't know me personally, so you really don't need to show me any concern or sympathy - and I don't want it either.

 

I only had a dig at you because you keep complaining about this thread like people are forcing you to stay here. I just don't get it. All I did was just remind you that if you are bothered by the heat in this thread, then just leave rather than tell people what they should and should not argue about.

 

@ 73duster

 

Yeah I changed my mind about the poll because I remembered only after agreeing to it that it could be RDF-biased. No contradiction, just me amending an error of judgement.

How is it RDF biased. It's a general consensus that more people are satisfied with the map. It's not like the person who made the poll voted a million times to make it off kilter. More people are just optimistic about the game and are excited for it. Now, if that turns out to be a huge disappointment to them, then that's too bad. I honestly think you guys are in the better boat though, because I'm sure when you play the game, all of you're worries will be positively debunked.

 

I hate how everyone is bashing you all for hoping the map isn't what it appears to be, it's not like you guys want it to be small, you're just concerned it might be. People need to get that into their heads and let it go without taking it so personally.

 

Live I've said though, I'm satisfied with what I see, and I think you guys should still respect that too. It seems like most people just degrade you guys, which is unacceptable, but a few post made you guys off to be a little to absolutist about your opinions. For example, when you guys call people who don't think the map is small diluted or delusional. it's a pointless comment, and makes you look ignorant. Don't take this personally, just trying to state what I see.

[UberVIIX]

Isn't it fair to say, simply, that both IV's Liberty City and V's Los Santos are a similar size? Los Santos is a little smaller, but it's one solid clump of city rather than split up into islands. The overall map is going to be far bigger than anything in GTA history. There's nothing small about this game really.

I agree.

Agree with what ?

 

Nobody disputed that, so you are just agreeing with what nobody argued against in the first place.

You have some serious issues.

Don't worry about my issues.

 

You wanna discuss, debate or argue the city size ? Let's go to the table and stay on topic.

 

If you wanna talk about my personal life, the politely shut the f**k up and don't worry about it. You don't know me in that way ok ?

 

Cheers

Coming here to visit old General every day is reminiscent of going to a loony bin everyday to see if that crazy old man is doing any better. The sad part is just like any debilitating mental illness, it's always worse, never better... Your therapist has ALOT to answer for.

 

Maybe we can get some charity groups to come in and visit you and some of the other guys who are prisoner to this thread, maybe some bingo or shuffle board... Ah whats the use you would just argue over the size of the bingo cards, or the shuffle board itself.... Just remember to take you meds like the doctor ordered...

[Official General]

@ UberIIX

 

Okay, I heard you. Once again thanks for your concern

 

Rather than constructively discuss this actual topic (even with some relevant banter), you choose to persist in diverging into talking about my so-called issues and my state of mind. You don't know me personally but yet I'm of interest to you in a strange way.

 

Well it ends here on my part, I've given you enough attention in replies. Continue talking about my "issues" until your heart's content. You are on your own, I'm no longer gonna waste time with you, I got nothing more to prove to you or anyone else.

 

From here on, your silly posts will be ignored and I will not be replying to them.

 

@ SuccessPasta

 

I will reply to you properly later, you made some good and fair points

Edited May 25, 2013 by Official General

[ImbetterThanYou]

I just wanna know why Daniel Houser felt the need to exaggerate the size of the map in the GI issue last year, because to me he made it seem as though GTA V was gonna be so big it was gonna make Africa look like a tiny Welsh village but instead here we are 198 pages and counting into complaints about the seemingly diminutive stature of a city they've been working on for over 5 years, yes 5 f*cking years, maybe if he never lied like that our expectations wouldn't have been raised so high and disappointment could have been averted.

[icandothisallday]

I just wanna know why Daniel Houser felt the need to exaggerate the size of the map in the GI issue last year, because to me he made it seem as though GTA V was gonna be so big it was gonna make Africa look like a tiny Welsh village but instead here we are 198 pages and counting into complaints about the seemingly diminutive stature of a city they've been working on for over 5 years, yes 5 f*cking years, maybe if he never lied like that our expectations wouldn't have been raised so high and disappointment could have been averted.

prove he lied you goofy bastard! f*ck! YOU HAVENT SEEN THE GAME YET! YOU HAVENT SEEN THE ENTIRE MAP YET! YOU HAVENT EVEN SEEN ALL OF LOS SANTOS! nobody here can prove sh*t until the game comes out! i dont even think anybody could prove him wrong after the game comes out. ask anybody how big rdr is? or gta IV? or san andreas? ask 100 people on these forums. you will get 100 different answers. if you dont like the game or its too small for you even though its rockstars biggest game to date... DONT f*ckING BUY IT!!!!

[GTAfan786]

 

I just wanna know why Daniel Houser felt the need to exaggerate the size of the map in the GI issue last year, because to me he made it seem as though GTA V was gonna be so big it was gonna make Africa look like a tiny Welsh village but instead here we are 198 pages and counting into complaints about the seemingly diminutive stature of a city they've been working on for over 5 years, yes 5 f*cking years, maybe if he never lied like that our expectations wouldn't have been raised so high and disappointment could have been averted.

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

[Njale]

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

While it will be the biggest one they created, according to the blueprint size there is no way it's going to be bigger than RDR, SA and IV with room to spare.

[GTAfan786]

 

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

While it will be the biggest one they created, according to the blueprint size there is no way it's going to be bigger than RDR, SA and IV with room to spare.

 

The blueprint size means nothing. They would obviously have to compress the map to fit it on the blue print, just like how some of the screenshots/trailer pics are compressed. They aren't just going to give it away 4 months before the release.

[allftw]

 

I just wanna know why Daniel Houser felt the need to exaggerate the size of the map in the GI issue last year, because to me he made it seem as though GTA V was gonna be so big it was gonna make Africa look like a tiny Welsh village but instead here we are 198 pages and counting into complaints about the seemingly diminutive stature of a city they've been working on for over 5 years, yes 5 f*cking years, maybe if he never lied like that our expectations wouldn't have been raised so high and disappointment could have been averted.

No one lied about anything. At least as far as we know.

 

@Njale

 

When you include interiors and underwater areas that statement is probably accurate.

[AceHigh11]

 

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

While it will be the biggest one they created, according to the blueprint size there is no way it's going to be bigger than RDR, SA and IV with room to spare.

SA = 13.9 square miles

IV = 6.8 square miles

RDR = 6 square miles (?) (playable area I think)

 

So that's 26.7 square miles, if those numbers are correct.

 

I found a good calculation on these forums that comes up with the total size of V's map being bigger than 23 square miles.

It used the square grids on the blueprint map as starting point; 1 square being equal to 1 km².

I'll search for it if someone wants to see it.

 

I also think R* said it will be bigger than SA + IV + RDR if you include interior spaces, but I'm not sure.

 

Edit: Yeah thx allftw

[Deffpony]

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

While it will be the biggest one they created, according to the blueprint size there is no way it's going to be bigger than RDR, SA and IV with room to spare.

 

The blueprint size means nothing. They would obviously have to compress the map to fit it on the blue print, just like how some of the screenshots/trailer pics are compressed. They aren't just going to give it away 4 months before the release.

I dont know how you can say the blueprint means nothing. If you have read the past 10 pages you would be able to see that the blueprint pretty much confirms most of our fears that the map is smaller than we had originally expected.

[GTAfan786]

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

While it will be the biggest one they created, according to the blueprint size there is no way it's going to be bigger than RDR, SA and IV with room to spare.

 

The blueprint size means nothing. They would obviously have to compress the map to fit it on the blue print, just like how some of the screenshots/trailer pics are compressed. They aren't just going to give it away 4 months before the release.

I dont know how you can say the blueprint means nothing. If you have read the past 10 pages you would be able to see that the blueprint pretty much confirms most of our fears that the map is smaller than we had originally expected.

What? That's only the city (downtown) and even then it looks compressed, unless you are talking about the fan made maps. We should wait till Rockstar release the full map when they do, or wait until Sept 17th, because it will feel huge in game.

[allftw]

I dont know how you can say the blueprint means nothing. If you have read the past 10 pages you would be able to see that the blueprint pretty much confirms most of our fears that the map is smaller than we had originally expected.

What? That's only the city (downtown) and even then it looks compressed, unless you are talking about the fan made maps. We should wait till Rockstar release the full map when they do, or wait until Sept 17th, because it will feel huge in game.

Since we know the exact dimensions of the map and that the revealed area covers the entire width of it, we can pretty much guess how big the overall map would be.

[Raavi]

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

While it will be the biggest one they created, according to the blueprint size there is no way it's going to be bigger than RDR, SA and IV with room to spare.

 

The blueprint size means nothing. They would obviously have to compress the map to fit it on the blue print, just like how some of the screenshots/trailer pics are compressed. They aren't just going to give it away 4 months before the release.

I dont know how you can say the blueprint means nothing. If you have read the past 10 pages you would be able to see that the blueprint pretty much confirms most of our fears that the map is smaller than we had originally expected.

What? That's only the city (downtown) and even then it looks compressed, unless you are talking about the fan made maps. We should wait till Rockstar release the full map when they do, or wait until Sept 17th, because it will feel huge in game.

Ignorance is a bliss, is your mantra right?

[AceHigh11]

@GTAfan786

People have compared screenshots with the blueprint map. Watch the blimp one. You clearly see the map is legit and can be used to get a sense of scale. R* even gave us the dimensions of the entire blueprint map, so we can estimate the entire size of the map.

 

Edit: again ninja'd by allftw.. FFS man

[Deffpony]

 

What a f*cking retard. Seriously, get out of this forum. Dan said the MAP is the biggest one they've created yet, where's the exaggeration? You clearly don't know anything, so you decide to talk out of your dirty ass. If the map is SA + RDR + IV, then that is the biggest map they've made.

While it will be the biggest one they created, according to the blueprint size there is no way it's going to be bigger than RDR, SA and IV with room to spare.

 

The blueprint size means nothing. They would obviously have to compress the map to fit it on the blue print, just like how some of the screenshots/trailer pics are compressed. They aren't just going to give it away 4 months before the release.

I dont know how you can say the blueprint means nothing. If you have read the past 10 pages you would be able to see that the blueprint pretty much confirms most of our fears that the map is smaller than we had originally expected.

What? That's only the city (downtown) and even then it looks compressed, unless you are talking about the fan made maps. We should wait till Rockstar release the full map when they do, or wait until Sept 17th, because it will feel huge in game.

Once again, by map, I mean the city, this thread is about the city. For the last two months people have been singing about...

 

"The city will be MASSIVE, stop complaining!"

 

"No! GI said that the city is bigger than LC so shut up!"

 

"We havent even seen all of the city, theres still alot that is hidden fagzors!"

 

Yet here we are, with a blueprint of the city that pretty much confirms everything we have been saying. The city is not bigger than LC. There isnt a hidden portion of the city somewhere. Case closed.

 

Like my previous post stated, we can only hope that the quality of the city will be much better than IV, with loads of things to do. AFter all quality is better than quantity.