Map Size Thread

[Deffpony]

I know this is crazy talk, but I dont think that location even exists. I think that scene was cg. If you look at trailer one there are alot of scenes that kind of dont seem in engine, but this one for sure.

 

Thanks for not giving me a rash of sh*t guys...

[kesta195]

I know this is crazy talk, but I dont think that location even exists. I think that scene was cg. If you look at trailer one there are alot of scenes that kind of dont seem in engine, but this one for sure.

 

Thanks for not giving me a rash of sh*t guys...

It's still there, someone emailed R* and asked them not long ago.

[lazloisdavrock]

@Deffpony I have to agree with you completely. They say the map is diverse but I can't see it. Sure, it may have different areas to it but oh well, we'll see come the 17th.

 

And this is where that mountain range went..

 

 

You know what else bothers me? We haven't seen these "moving clouds" since this scene either.

yes we have actually. 2nd trailer overlooking the city when the logo comes up

[œaœa]

@Deffpony I have to agree with you completely. They say the map is diverse but I can't see it. Sure, it may have different areas to it but oh well, we'll see come the 17th.

 

And this is where that mountain range went..

 

 

You know what else bothers me? We haven't seen these "moving clouds" since this scene either.

yes we have actually. 2nd trailer overlooking the city when the logo comes up

Those are a different kind of clouds though, rewatch the scene and you'll see what I'm talking about.

[Deffpony]

With that mountain range aside, I agree with sibs. The map doesnt give me the feeling of diversity they are toting.

 

I would have rather had no underwater areas and another small city. But Im keeping an open mind so that come release the map can speak for itself

[lazloisdavrock]

honestly i think we will all be surprised when the map is finally shown.

[Deffpony]

honestly i think we will all be surprised when the map is finally shown.

Im hopeful for the same.

[lazloisdavrock]

@Deffpony I have to agree with you completely. They say the map is diverse but I can't see it. Sure, it may have different areas to it but oh well, we'll see come the 17th.

 

And this is where that mountain range went..

 

 

You know what else bothers me? We haven't seen these "moving clouds" since this scene either.

yes we have actually. 2nd trailer overlooking the city when the logo comes up

Those are a different kind of clouds though, rewatch the scene and you'll see what I'm talking about.

wow yes i see what you're saying now.... hard to describe but they look lifelike... actual moisture vapor

[WolfbackGames]

I know this is crazy talk, but I dont think that location even exists. I think that scene was cg. If you look at trailer one there are alot of scenes that kind of dont seem in engine, but this one for sure.

 

Thanks for not giving me a rash of sh*t guys...

There are a lot of things from the first trailer which were either CG or no longer there.

 

This for example:

There are what look to be mountains on the S/SE side of the city..

 

But in the blueprint:

 

They're gone.

 

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

 

@Deffpony I have to agree with you completely. They say the map is diverse but I can't see it. Sure, it may have different areas to it but oh well, we'll see come the 17th.

 

And this is where that mountain range went..

 

 

You know what else bothers me? We haven't seen these "moving clouds" since this scene either.

You've got to be kidding me. That mountain is obviously the Mt Chilliad, we've seen it so many times! That's not a green screen, the location exists! Oh yeah, and of course we're not going to see those moving clouds again, obviously the first trailer looked nothing like #2, #3, nor the gameplay.

 

Edit: Now I agree with you on diversity. Where is the large desert, large dense forests, snowy mountains? I know Southern California is mostly dry, mountainous, land with scattered pines but I was really craving at least one desert and a few dense, like really dense, forests. Forests so dense you'd get scared in them. I agree with Deffpony.

Edited July 18, 2013 by StingrayX

[Deffpony]

I think that trailer one shot is facing west more...

 

 

[Eutyphro]

 

Im gonna be honest with you guys, and please dont flame me because im just voicing my opinion.

 

But from what we have seen of the whole map of V, its hard for me not to get the feeling that SA felt bigger. Yes I know that V is much bigger than SA, and it IS huge in terms of detail. But after looking at the mapping topic, it feels like we have seen just about all the map has to offer and Im really not blown away.

 

The last ray of hope was that "Paleto" was something significant, but it seems pretty meh.

 

There are desert like areas, but not really a baron desert. There are forrested areas, but not really a dense forrest. And Im still not sold on the whole one city idea. There doesnt appear to be an airport far north, which sucks because theres one in LS and two in blaine county close to Los Alamos.

 

Im not the spoiled brat type, but im just not as excited for this map as I expected to be when trailer one came out.

 

 

And where the f*ck did this mountain range go???[/img]

 

I would have rather had no underwater areas and another small city.

I haven't been following the mapping thread, but if you see the first post, it says there are still large parts of the map that are unknown, and that all the scales that are not in the blueprint might be off. So how big the forests and deserts are remains unknown.

 

You judge the 'feel' of the map on the trailers and screenshots, when the feel is something to judge when playing. What we can judge right now are facts, and the facts are all favouring GTA V in front of San Andreas and IV by a lot.

 

And that mountain range might very well still be in game. I can't see why not. It might be a specific angle on a mountain that hasn't been repeated. Because I really don't see why they would show us a mountain that is not ingame. R* has never done that, and has no reason to do that, because the actual map has plenty of interesting sights that could be used in a trailer.

 

Los Santos is 120 percent of LC in stead of 90 percent which you calculated near the end of May, which already had you satisfied, so that should impres you a little.

 

And you can't compare the underwater area with another city when it comes to research and how much menory it takes up. The underwater area is just because this game has to have the possibility of diving, and when R* does something they do it well, which is why the underwater swimming is so detailed now.

Edited July 18, 2013 by gtaxpert

[œaœa]

Or this..

 

 

 

And WTF those palm trees in the distance are gone as well...

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

I think this mountain:

http://images.wikia.com/gtawiki/images/9/9...NT-CHILLIAD.jpg

And this mountain:

http://i.imgur.com/Nw4euJX.jpg

Are the same. If not then the mountain shown in the first trailer is probably just a part of those mountains near the main one.

 

@Above, trees have been cut. Also I don't think that's a mountain. It's smog or fog.

[lazloisdavrock]

LOL rockstar is removing all the things

[brian.]

 

Or this..

And WTF those palm trees in the distance are gone as well...

The palm trees aren't "gone" so much as "view distance" and "detail distance" and likely a new "foliage density" is lowered. The earlier to promo, the higher the settings. The later stuff is actual console gameplay - the early promo will be how the game looks on PC that can run those settings, I assure. But not every PC will do it. Most will play console level for 40fps smooth, or they will boost up some settings and play 20 to 30 fps as the cost - so don't worry, I'm not bashing consoles - but I am saying that what you see in screens, early ones especially, is the PC settings equivilents - what we see later missing/removing/etc is really just lowered settings to make sure the game runs its very best to enjoy.

Edited July 18, 2013 by brian.

[Eutyphro]

LOL rockstar is removing all the things

They changed some trees, and you guys are mistaking smog for mountains. I don't think they are changing the map so late in the process.

[WolfbackGames]

LOL rockstar is removing all the things

I guess it's expected. The first trailer WAS from a build from two years ago.. but it seems odd how they took a whole mountain range out on the south side of the city.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

LOL  rockstar is removing all the things

I guess it's expected. The first trailer WAS from a build from two years ago.. but it seems odd how they took a whole mountain range out on the south side of the city.

There was never a mountain range there. That's fog/smog.

[WolfbackGames]

LOL  rockstar is removing all the things

I guess it's expected. The first trailer WAS from a build from two years ago.. but it seems odd how they took a whole mountain range out on the south side of the city.

There was never a mountain range there. That's fog/smog.

That's a reasonable argument, but when I flew over LA a few years ago, the smog really wasn't that thick. And even so, where did this magic mountain-looking-smog go after the first trailer? Sure it may not be in the shape of a mountain, but you would be able to see distinct cloud fog stuff over the city in recent screenshots, which we can't.

[brian.]

Again, it's not removal - nothing that is "close to the camera" has appeared to be removed, thus, it's really just lower settings for actual console stuff, and early promos were higher settings. Consoles don't get graphics settings, they are locked out for a reason. The early screenshots are downscaled running on a PC or suped up dev box - they haven't removed things, just lowered view, detail distance to make it run good - not to be confused with master draw distance.

 

The only thing that has changed in the close range/near clip of the promo screenshots is texture size. That has been halved on many screens that can be compared to the first rounds of screens.

 

If it's such a big problem, the PC version will let you max it out like the early screenshots. But the console version must be optimal, they can't tell you to change settings or that a part is unsupported or too old - they need it to run good. It's not like PC where the gamer needs to make sure his pc can handle it or lower it - it's consoles, where the consumer expects it to "just work", so you gotta accept these kind of tradeoffs if you want to play on consoles.

 

WHATEVER you see change = the console cannot handle it. This is a fact. But doesn't mean all PC players will get a full experience. Most will use console settings, some even lower. Only a small percentage will max this game without upgrading first..

[GTAaLEX117]

Wow, what's with the negativity around here?

 

Firstly, that mountain range is still pretty much in the game, you can see the same type of rock crests in the screenshot that depicts the N-E part of the map, it's Alamo (or Chilliad if you will).

 

Secondly, why are you even arguing about diversity? We've seen mountains, city, underwater, grasslands, marshes, beaches, deserts (the whole area between the Hollywood hills and Sandy Shores, which we've never really seen up-close). What more do you really expect?

 

Thirdly, who said they removed forests (or toned them down)? We've only seen them removing a couple of trees from a highly inaccessible mountain peak area...probably to make it actually accessible to vehicles. They've added vegetation in other areas, such as the mountains around the dam.

 

Finally, the map seems more than big enough.

If Los Santos is properly scaled in my comparison (and I see no reason why it wouldn't be):

 

 

Then this is how the map would look like if it was only made up of LC + SA:

 

 

San Andreas felt massive, since it really was so. Now we have a map at least the same size as LC + SA + RDR...if something this big and with this amount of detail doesn't impress people...I don't know what will.

[GTA54life]

 

Wow, what's with the negativity around here?

 

Firstly, that mountain range is still pretty much in the game, you can see the same type of rock crests in the screenshot that depicts the N-E part of the map, it's Alamo (or Chilliad if you will).

 

Secondly, why are you even arguing about diversity? We've seen mountains, city, underwater, grasslands, marshes, beaches, deserts (the whole area between the Hollywood hills and Sandy Shores, which we've never really seen up-close). What more do you really expect?

 

Thirdly, who said they removed forests (or toned them down)? We've only seen them removing a couple of trees from a highly inaccessible mountain peak area...probably to make it actually accessible to vehicles. They've added vegetation in other areas, such as the mountains around the dam.

 

Finally, the map seems more than big enough.

If Los Santos is properly scaled in my comparison (and I see no reason why it wouldn't be):

 

 

 

San Andreas felt massive, since it really was so. Now we have a map at least the same size as LC + SA + RDR...if something this big and with this amount of detail doesn't impress people...I don't know what will.

 

People expect too much.

Edited July 18, 2013 by GTA54life

[œaœa]

Or this..

And WTF those palm trees in the distance are gone as well...

The palm trees aren't "gone" so much as "view distance" and "detail distance" and likely a new "foliage density" is lowered. The earlier to promo, the higher the settings. The later stuff is actual console gameplay - the early promo will be how the game looks on PC that can run those settings, I assure. But not every PC will do it. Most will play console level for 40fps smooth, or they will boost up some settings and play 20 to 30 fps as the cost - so don't worry, I'm not bashing consoles - but I am saying that what you see in screens, early ones especially, is the PC settings equivilents - what we see later missing/removing/etc is really just lowered settings to make sure the game runs its very best to enjoy.

As a console and PC gamer I should have thought of that.

[lazloisdavrock]

is that the mulholland intersection

[Eutyphro]

 

People expect too much.

Don't quote massive posts for no reason. Edit it out.

[Backfire6]

No we expect what we were promised actually. But instead they are taking away trees/entire mountain sides or taking away half the confirmed map and replacing it with water instead.

[Eutyphro]

No we expect what we were promised actually. But instead they are taking away trees/entire mountain sides or taking away half the confirmed map and replacing it with water instead.

Yeah, you didn't really read any of the posts that showed how incorrect that is now have you?

[Marty892]

 

Wow, what's with the negativity around here?

 

Firstly, that mountain range is still pretty much in the game, you can see the same type of rock crests in the screenshot that depicts the N-E part of the map, it's Alamo (or Chilliad if you will).

 

Secondly, why are you even arguing about diversity? We've seen mountains, city, underwater, grasslands, marshes, beaches, deserts (the whole area between the Hollywood hills and Sandy Shores, which we've never really seen up-close). What more do you really expect?

 

Thirdly, who said they removed forests (or toned them down)? We've only seen them removing a couple of trees from a highly inaccessible mountain peak area...probably to make it actually accessible to vehicles. They've added vegetation in other areas, such as the mountains around the dam.

 

Finally, the map seems more than big enough.

If Los Santos is properly scaled in my comparison (and I see no reason why it wouldn't be):

 

 

Then this is how the map would look like if it was only made up of LC + SA:

 

 

San Andreas felt massive, since it really was so. Now we have a map at least the same size as LC + SA + RDR...if something this big and with this amount of detail doesn't impress people...I don't know what will.

Wrong, it cant be scaled that way. Look at this:

No way they are the same size.

[WolfbackGames]

I guess my problem is the fact that I don't get that vibe that I got when I watched the first trailer. GTAV felt new and fresh. It's hard to explain, but it had a certain feel which isn't there in the recent trailers. GTAV will still be a fantastic game, and I seriously can't wait for it to come out, but idk.

 

Anyway, we sorta derailed the topic.