Map Size Thread

[bakerach]

 

Assume for one moment that the source of that quote is legitimate, nothing was lost in translation, Houser was referring to the actual map size specifically and that Houser was correct.

 

Assume that it was all true.

Not too hard to find... And there's nothing lost in translation- "Este mundo es dos veces más grande que el presentado en GTA: San Andreas".

This directly translates to "this world is 2 times bigger than the one presented in GTA San Andreas."

 

Take that how you will, but it's pretty cut-and-dry. Maybe you can get chacowacko to do some awesome calculations or bad perspective comparisons to disprove the game's creator.

Here's the link. http://www.3djuegos.com/juegos/avances/496...ead-redemption/

[bakerach]

 

And in the end, who cares? Does that number really matter when we judge the game whilst playing it? We will judge the game on how much we like it when we play it. Not on some abstract fact about it that is in the end pretty unverifiable.

Haha, they don't care about the game, they care about being argumentative (which they are) and being right (the jury's out on that one, but it's not looking good)

[Choco Taco]

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

 

Then the "room to spare" would be less than the 6 square miles of GTA IV. Otherwise, they would have said "bigger than SA, RDR, and 2 GTA IV maps." They're not going to refer to the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare".

[The Hate]

Given: San andreas=36km squared, Liberty City=8.9km squared

 

v=Los Santos(GTA V)

r=Red Dead Redemption

?=room to spare

 

v=3.5r (because LS=3.5rdr's)

v=36+r+8.9+? (because Ls=SA+rdr+Lc+"room to spare")

 

1)Substitute the first equation into the second

 

3.5r=36+r+8.9+?

 

2)Subtract one r from both sides, simplify the known numbers

 

2.5r=44.9+?

 

Now here's where the estimation diverges

 

 

3a)If rdr is twice as big than SA, then r=72

2.5(72)=44.9+?

?=135.1km sqaured

 

The "room to spare" is a whopping 135.1km squared

 

 

3b) If rdr is half as big as SA then r=18

2.5(18)=44.9+?

?=0.1km squared

 

The "room to spare" is a measily .1km

 

 

In conclusion, the estimation of Los Santos's size depends on one's interpretation of "room to spare"

Edited June 7, 2013 by The Hate

[RockStarNiko]

It would help to actually see the interview so we could know the context of the Houser quote, if the quote was said to begin with

If you would go to all the links in what I sent you then you would find this http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...%2F&sl=es&tl=en as the original source.

 

If it was a significant size, they wouldn't have said "room to spare".  They would have changed the numbers from 3.5 x RDR to something like 4 x RDR or whatever was appropriate.

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

Maybe we should take all these statements with a grain of salt? Sometimes there is also confusion about whether interiors are used in a clever way to make certain statements.

 

I feel like no one can really make perfect sense of these statements yet, and judge them. I think it's obvious to see how it is hard to compare the scaling of Games like RDR IV and SA with each other. I'm not a technical mastermind, but that seems obvious to me. Comparing IV and V would seem like an easier task to me, seeing how similar those are. RDR, IV and SA are just so different.

 

And in the end, who cares? Does that number really matter when we judge the game whilst playing it? We will judge the game on how much we like it when we play it. Not on some abstract fact about it that is in the end pretty unverifiable.

I did go to the source you provided and I have already seen that source previously.

 

My issue with that source is that it has been translated and also we do not see the transcript of the actual interview.

 

The writer of the article is saying "Dan Houser said", but not printing the actual conversation they had.

 

Also as I am not familiar with the website in any way, I have no idea how reliable the source actually is.

[RockStarNiko]

Assume for one moment that the source of that quote is legitimate, nothing was lost in translation, Houser was referring to the actual map size specifically and that Houser was correct.

 

Assume that it was all true.

Not too hard to find... And there's nothing lost in translation- "Este mundo es dos veces más grande que el presentado en GTA: San Andreas".

This directly translates to "this world is 2 times bigger than the one presented in GTA San Andreas."

 

Take that how you will, but it's pretty cut-and-dry. Maybe you can get chacowacko to do some awesome calculations or bad perspective comparisons to disprove the game's creator.

Here's the link. http://www.3djuegos.com/juegos/avances/496...ead-redemption/

Assume for one moment that the source of that quote is legitimate, nothing was lost in translation, Houser was referring to the actual map size specifically and that Houser was correct.

 

Assume that it was all true.

 

So, we have a map size of RDR being 72 sq km.

 

This in turn would mean that GTA V will be 252 sq km, which is just under 100 sq miles.

 

10 miles from edge to edge.

 

I really hope that is true, because I want a huge GTA game, but I cannot see it happening especially after we have seen the blueprint map of the city.

 

 

So, if GTA V is not going to be 100 sq miles and not even close to that, then the Houser statement and the Garbut statement cannot both be true. One is a false statement.

 

Now, it is a question of who we believe is more qualified between Houser and Garbut.

 

Garbut is I think the Art Director and Houser the producer/writer.

 

Personally I would lean towards the art director as I believe they would have more hands on knowledge.

 

 

It would help to actually see the interview so we could know the context of the Houser quote, if the quote was said to begin with

 

[bakerach]

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

 

Then the "room to spare" would be less than the 6 square miles of GTA IV. Otherwise, they would have said "bigger than SA, RDR, and 2 GTA IV maps." They're not going to refer to the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare".

Choco- take a look at yourself. You've reached the point where you've accepted that "room to spare" could mean 6 square miles of map, and you're still complaining about it. I'm done being frustrated with you, now I'm concerned for your well-being. Go outside, see the sun, ride a bike- just please, get back in touch with reality. We're all pulling for you here at GTAForums!

[wallis]

so youre saying los santos is 3 square miles? to be clear since youre a f*cking idiot, thatd be roughly 1.7 miles wide by 1.7 miles long... so 3 square miles? youre f*cking serious? and just to be clear... who in the fuuuck came up with rdr 6.5 square miles and what formula did you use?

I'm not sure how accurate any of the esimates are. Some are in game measurements, others just educated guesses. It's believed that LC is 6.5sqr miles total map area including the rivers. Take out those rivers and it's only 3.2sqr miles. When you compare this compressed riverless LC to the new LS 3sqr miles could be about right.

[Choco Taco]

Maybe you can get chacowacko to do some awesome calculations or bad perspective comparisons to disprove the game's creator.

 

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtop...entry1062567707

 

[Eutyphro]

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

 

Then the "room to spare" would be less than the 6 square miles of GTA IV. Otherwise, they would have said "bigger than SA, RDR, and 2 GTA IV maps." They're not going to refer to the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare".

And you base that on what?

[Choco Taco]

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

 

Then the "room to spare" would be less than the 6 square miles of GTA IV. Otherwise, they would have said "bigger than SA, RDR, and 2 GTA IV maps." They're not going to refer to the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare".

And you base that on what?

common sense

 

Do you really think they're going to refer to an area larger than the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare"?

 

 

[Eutyphro]

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

 

Then the "room to spare" would be less than the 6 square miles of GTA IV. Otherwise, they would have said "bigger than SA, RDR, and 2 GTA IV maps." They're not going to refer to the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare".

And you base that on what?

common sense

 

Do you really think they're going to refer to an area larger than the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare"?

It can't be ruled out as easily as you do.

[RockStarNiko]

We need this for reference.

 

The forum member who posted is F4t4l1ty.

 

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtop...entry1062145036

 

 

 

 

Hi. I created these maps in vector CAD program. I used traniers to find out ingame coordinates and find out coordinates of most western and most eastern points on the map (you can see it in some images). Then it's easy put image into the program and resize it correctly. Islands are basically traced(outlined?) 2D polygons and I can determine their area. Maybe it's useful for someone

 

IMAGES:

A is area (km^2)

P is perimeter (km)

 

LC:

not in scale with SA image!!!

 

SA:

not in scale with LC image!!!

 

SA + LC in scale:

 

Links to other images:

 

How accurate outline is:

http://i.imgur.com/cmSq5.png

http://i.imgur.com/7Mxad.jpg

 

Areas as squares, rectangles... These are IN SCALE

Green square means whole area, blue square/rectangle (they have the same area) means land area.

 

http://i.imgur.com/IF9HX.png

http://i.imgur.com/F3ahN.png

 

NUMBERS: (easy to copy and paste )

 

IV [km^2]:

land area:

2,396067593

0,812829107

0,113625854

0,085870403

2,590697386

2,275042850

0,0770387288

_______________

sum=8,35117192

 

whole area:

16,926357

 

---------------

 

SA [km^2]:

land area:

10,89199658

1,794137002

6,491151755

6,929379868

0,106944812

2,475209007

______________

sum=28,688819

 

whole area:

35,701523

 

---------------

 

LC+SA [km^2]:

 

52,62788

 

 

 

[bakerach]

 

It would help to actually see the interview so we could know the context of the Houser quote, if the quote was said to begin with

Did you miss the link I provided for you when you quoted me? http://www.3djuegos.com/juegos/avances/496...ead-redemption/

 

@chocko- you really just don't get it, dear. Bless your heart, you try though.

[RockStarNiko]

It would help to actually see the interview so we could know the context of the Houser quote, if the quote was said to begin with

Did you miss the link I provided for you when you quoted me? http://www.3djuegos.com/juegos/avances/496...ead-redemption/

 

@chocko- you really just don't get it, dear. Bless your heart, you try though.

 

 

So, we have a map size of RDR being 72 sq km.

 

This in turn would mean that GTA V will be 252 sq km, which is just under 100 sq miles.

 

10 miles from edge to edge.

 

I really hope that is true, because I want a huge GTA game, but I cannot see it happening especially after we have seen the blueprint map of the city.

 

 

So, if GTA V is not going to be 100 sq miles and not even close to that, then the Houser statement and the Garbut statement cannot both be true. One is a false statement.

 

Now, it is a question of who we believe is more qualified between Houser and Garbut.

 

Garbut is I think the Art Director and Houser the producer/writer.

 

Personally I would lean towards the art director as I believe they would have more hands on knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dick Valor]

 

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

 

Then the "room to spare" would be less than the 6 square miles of GTA IV. Otherwise, they would have said "bigger than SA, RDR, and 2 GTA IV maps." They're not going to refer to the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare".

And you base that on what?

common sense

 

Do you really think they're going to refer to an area larger than the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare"?

It can't be ruled out as easily as you do.

Choco Taco's reasoning is sound. R* would have specified if the "room to spare" could include another game world. Why not say "bigger than Red Dead, IV, SA, and VC combined" or "Red Dead, SA, and two GTA IVs combined" if either was true? Either statement would make the map seem bigger and generate more hype than the original statement imo.

[Ferocious Banger]

This page has multiple deja-vu moments. :gogle:

[Choco Taco]

@chocko- you really just don't get it, dear. Bless your heart, you try though.

It must really hurt to claim multiple times that the screenshots aren't comparable and then have your size estimate contradict everything you said and show that they are.

 

 

[RockStarNiko]

 

Area inside the green rectangle is 25.77 sq km.

 

If you to expand the green rectangle so that it included the entire map we find in the game, then we would be approaching 36 sq km.

 

This is interesting in my opinion.

 

 

If Red Dead was using a scale 2x that of San Andreas, then we would end up with

 

playable area = ~26 sq km or ~10 sq miles

area within rectangle = ~51 sq km or ~20 sq miles

total map area = ~72 sq km or ~28 sq miles

 

Or instead scale down San Andreas, so that compared to Red Dead it is actually 18 sq km, with Red Dead being 13 sq km playable.

 

 

This would result in San Andreas > Red Dead and Red Dead > San Andreas both being accurate statements, depending on your point of view, as Obi-Wan would say

 

 

 

As for GTA V, it would almost certainly use the Red Dead scale and not the SA scale (this is only if there is a scale difference obviously)

 

So GTA V could be

 

3.5 x playable area 13 sq km = 45.5 sq km (91 sq km compared to San Andreas)

5 x playable area 13 sq km = 65 sq km (130 sq km compared to San Andreas)

 

 

 

GTA IV = ~17 sq km playable

RDR = ~13 sq km playable

SA = ~36 sq km playable

Total = 66 sq km playable

 

5 x RDR playable = ~65 sq km

 

GTA V = 65 sq km + "interiors" + "room to spare" > GTA IV + RDR + SA = ~66 sq km

Edited June 7, 2013 by RockStarNiko

[PoliceFarm]

We need this for reference.

 

The forum member who posted is F4t4l1ty.

 

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtop...entry1062145036

 

 

 

 

Hi. I created these maps in vector CAD program. I used traniers to find out ingame coordinates and find out coordinates of most western and most eastern points on the map (you can see it in some images). Then it's easy put image into the program and resize it correctly. Islands are basically traced(outlined?) 2D polygons and I can determine their area. Maybe it's useful for someone

 

IMAGES:

A is area (km^2)

P is perimeter (km)

 

LC:

not in scale with SA image!!!

 

SA:

not in scale with LC image!!!

 

SA + LC in scale:

 

Links to other images:

 

How accurate outline is:

http://i.imgur.com/cmSq5.png

http://i.imgur.com/7Mxad.jpg

 

Areas as squares, rectangles... These are IN SCALE

Green square means whole area, blue square/rectangle (they have the same area) means land area.

 

http://i.imgur.com/IF9HX.png

http://i.imgur.com/F3ahN.png

 

NUMBERS: (easy to copy and paste )

 

IV [km^2]:

land area:

2,396067593

0,812829107

0,113625854

0,085870403

2,590697386

2,275042850

0,0770387288

_______________

sum=8,35117192

 

whole area:

16,926357

 

---------------

 

SA [km^2]:

land area:

10,89199658

1,794137002

6,491151755

6,929379868

0,106944812

2,475209007

______________

sum=28,688819

 

whole area:

35,701523

 

---------------

 

LC+SA [km^2]:

 

52,62788

 

 

 

This is such a perfect comparison, we know this to be so close to the exact numbers, yet people bring up that one quote over and over, even though playing the game and moving through the world you can tell that RDR is not twice the bloody size of SA.

 

Maybe the people who quoted Houser completely misinterprated what he said, did you ever consider that? Maybe he said something like RDR is more than twice the size of the desert area of SA, yet they didn't exactly know what he meant, we never got an exact quote, just some paraphrasing.

 

These journalistic errors pop up all the time, yet you idiots think it's more reliable than actual in game measurements or more accurate map studies like this.

[RockStarNiko]

I do believe that is is definitely possible that San Andreas is approximately half scale of more modern games such as GTA IV, RDR etc

 

Yesterday I was comparing San Andreas with Far Cry 3

 

I measured the Alhambra club in San Andreas as ~110 metres.

 

I stood at one end and looked towards the other end and tried to visualize the ~110 metres

 

Then I put a waypoint on the Far Cry 3 map and stood ~55 metres away.

 

Visually, the distance seemed comparable.

 

 

So the conclusion i made from this mini experiment was that if the North Island is 5.3 km west-east, then San Andreas (using FC3 scale) would be ~3 km west-east.

 

 

I really do believe this is the case, especially if you compare the absolutely huge mountain on South Island in FC3 with Chiliad in SA.

 

 

So, if SA is half scale of FC3, then it is definitely possible that it is also half scale of RDR and GTA V, maybe even GTA IV too.

 

 

I think we can compare RDR, GTA IV and FC3 to each other and they use the same scale. GTA V will use the same scale too and be largest of all

 

 

Would be nice if F4t4l1ty could put FC3 into the map size program

[Choco Taco]

 

So, if SA is half scale of FC3, then it is definitely possible that it is also half scale of RDR and GTA V, maybe even GTA IV too.

 

 

 

 

If it's half scale of RDR and V, why wouldn't it be for IV as well? It wouldn't make sense for IV and V to have different scales.

 

If a mile in SA is a half mile in IV, you get this:

 

[RockStarNiko]

 

So, if SA is half scale of FC3, then it is definitely possible that it is also half scale of RDR and GTA V, maybe even GTA IV too.

 

 

 

 

If it's half scale of RDR and V, why wouldn't it be for IV as well? It wouldn't make sense for IV and V to have different scales.

 

If a mile in SA is a half mile in IV, you get this:

 

 

I don't know. If scale of all these games is different, there is no way of comparing apart from just roaming around and getting a "feel" of how big the area you are in is

Edited June 7, 2013 by RockStarNiko

[SaVaGe308]

So, if SA is half scale of FC3, then it is definitely possible that it is also half scale of RDR and GTA V, maybe even GTA IV too.

 

 

 

 

If it's half scale of RDR and V, why wouldn't it be for IV as well? It wouldn't make sense for IV and V to have different scales.

 

If a mile in SA is a half mile in IV, you get this:

 

 

I don't know. If scale of all these games is different, there is no way of comparing apart from just roaming around and getting a "feel" of how big the area you are in is

ive been trying to tell choco this for days now. glad someone else finally stepped up and said the same

[SaVaGe308]

 

Uuhm, the room to spare comment referred to "GTA IV + SA + RDR". Not to "3.5 RDR".

 

 

Then the "room to spare" would be less than the 6 square miles of GTA IV. Otherwise, they would have said "bigger than SA, RDR, and 2 GTA IV maps." They're not going to refer to the size of one of their game maps as "room to spare".

Choco- take a look at yourself. You've reached the point where you've accepted that "room to spare" could mean 6 square miles of map, and you're still complaining about it. I'm done being frustrated with you, now I'm concerned for your well-being. Go outside, see the sun, ride a bike- just please, get back in touch with reality. We're all pulling for you here at GTAForums!

choco is just trolling, at least i hope so. if not hes the stupidest son of a bitch ive ever seen in my life. like bakerach and countless others have tried telling him san andreas is scaled differently. i can make a game the size of a regulation basketball court and make the in game measurements tell you its a mile long and 3 miles wide. doesnt make it so.

 

on topic: if you compare the link of the vincent thomas bridge from real life to the map of los santos and the santa anita raceway to the in game version the scale appears to be spot on. as with everyone else on the thread i am just speculating but if they are to scale then los santos is actually much larger than all of gta iv. cant wait for the game to come out so i can see for myself

Edited June 7, 2013 by SaVaGe308

[Choco Taco]

like bakerach and countless others have tried telling him san andreas is scaled differently.

Rockstar says V is bigger than SA + IV + RDR.

 

How do you add games that are scaled differently? If the scales are different, that means not only are the sizes of objects different, but things like the top speed of cars is different. Everything has to be relative. A game that's scaled smaller will have smaller and slower cars, but will feel the same as a game with a larger scale.

 

In order to add 2 games with different scales, you have to convert them to the same scale.

 

Also, there's a reason you and bakerach say things about me. It's because I made you both look stupid and you're mad about it. Every time you two call me names, I know it's because you're upset and I laugh about how I made you look like fools.

[wallis]

like bakerach and countless others have tried telling him san andreas is scaled differently.

Rockstar says V is bigger than SA + IV + RDR.

 

How do you add games that are scaled differently? If the scales are different, that means not only are the sizes of objects different, but things like the top speed of cars is different. Everything has to be relative. A game that's scaled smaller will have smaller and slower cars, but will feel the same as a game with a larger scale.

 

In order to add 2 games with different scales, you have to convert them to the same scale.

 

Also, there's a reason you and bakerach say things about me. It's because I made you both look stupid and you're mad about it. Every time you two call me names, I know it's because you're upset and I laugh about how I made you look like fools.

The fact that R* has put IV, RDR and SA together in the same comparison relative to the size of V shows that they're all scaled the same. Otherwise how could they be used together in a size estimation. The in game measuring system is the only 100% accurate measurement system we have.

@Choco. From early on in this thread, you were putting IV shots over the observatory shot showing how small V's LS is. Alot of ppl were calling it bullsh*t, saying it's all draw distance illusions and there's no way the city would be under 3.5 sqr miles. How silly they all look now.

[Raavi]

Judging by all the comparisons and calculations I've seen I can safely say LS is about the same size as LC. Maybe a bit bigger, maybe a tad smaller.

[GTAaLEX117]

 

@Choco. From early on in this thread, you were putting IV shots over the observatory shot showing how small V's LS is. Alot of ppl were calling it bullsh*t, saying it's all draw distance illusions and there's no way the city would be under 3.5 sqr miles. How silly they all look now.

Those shots would only work if the actual buildings were scaled to real life proportions, but as Deffpony demonstrated a few pages back, they aren't. The blueprint paints a pretty clear image of the scale of Los Santos though which is roughly the same size or larger than LC without the filler water.

 

Btw, when did this thread turn into SA vs RDR?

Edited June 7, 2013 by GTAaLEX117

[DiegoLosSantos]

So, if SA is half scale of FC3, then it is definitely possible that it is also half scale of RDR and GTA V, maybe even GTA IV too.

 

 

 

 

If it's half scale of RDR and V, why wouldn't it be for IV as well? It wouldn't make sense for IV and V to have different scales.

 

If a mile in SA is a half mile in IV, you get this:

 

that scale is definetly wrong. where do u have those stupid informations? did u ever watch this topic from the beginning? sa is more than two times as large as lc!