Map Size Thread

[GTAaLEX117]

I still wonder how the cul-de-sac's were incompatible with the road width method. I must've missed the explanation for that.

Yeah, those are the only roads that don't look alright on the blueprint map, the rest seem perfectly depicted from what we've seen so far.

 

[PHOENIXZERO]

 

Just to help get the thread back to the way it was, these were the last valid scales and methods posted around here:

 

Mine: http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/A...eRdVHighway.jpg

 

 

Something that's been bugging and confusing me about this and maybe I skimmed over the explanation and/or forgot or just didn't see in the mass of posts in this topic but using those sections as a scale shouldn't the LS road on the map be around twice as wide as the LC example going by the pictures used since in LS that looks like it's eight lands versus LC's four?

Edited July 19, 2013 by PHOENIXZERO

[GTAaLEX117]

 

Just to help get the thread back to the way it was, these were the last valid scales and methods posted around here:

 

Mine: http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/A...eRdVHighway.jpg

 

 

Something that's been bugging and confusing me about this and maybe it's either something I skimmed over or just didn't see in the mass of posts in this topic but using those sections as a scale shouldn't the LS road be around twice as wide as the LC example going by the pictures used since in LS that looks like it's eight lands versus LC's four?

Both highways have 4 lanes (I'm talking about the suspended one in V, not the 8 lane one below it). Also, the LS one has two extra shoulders and a wide median and the LC one only has a small median.

 

And yes, you are right, the LS one is bigger than the LC one by a considerable amount, so LS should also be depicted as bigger than LC (A while ago I actually did do a comparison of the maps where the LS road was bigger, and it ended up like this: http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/AlexXD94/MPexgr.jpg ). For some reason I though that was slightly exaggerated so I didn't use it but after seeing the scales that others obtained, it suddenly didn't seem that exaggerated anymore.

 

I should have updated it in my post though

 

Edit: I updated my previous post.

Edited July 19, 2013 by GTAaLEX117

[PHOENIXZERO]

 

Just to help get the thread back to the way it was, these were the last valid scales and methods posted around here:

 

Mine: http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/A...eRdVHighway.jpg

 

 

Something that's been bugging and confusing me about this and maybe it's either something I skimmed over or just didn't see in the mass of posts in this topic but using those sections as a scale shouldn't the LS road be around twice as wide as the LC example going by the pictures used since in LS that looks like it's eight lands versus LC's four?

Both highways have 4 lanes (I'm talking about the suspended one in V, not the 8 lane one below it). Also, the LS one has two extra shoulders and a wide median and the LC one only has a small median.

 

And yes, you are right, the LS one is bigger than the LC one by a considerable amount, so LS should also be depicted as bigger than LC (A while ago I actually did do a comparison of the maps where the LS road was bigger, and it ended up like this: http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/AlexXD94/MPexgr.jpg ). For some reason I though that was slightly exaggerated so I didn't use it but after seeing the scales that others obtained, it suddenly didn't seem that exaggerated anymore.

 

I should have updated it in my post though

 

Edit: I updated my previous post.

I see...

 

I had to stare at that overpass for way too long and look at the original picture to really notice it was only four lanes due to the vehicle placement and I was fighting with ignoring the broken lane marking. I guess the oddly placed vehicles in the screenshot are either switching lanes or stopped on the shoulders.

 

 

EDIT:

I dunno what so many expected out of Rockstar when it came to building LS, it's clearly larger than IV's Liberty City and in turn much, much larger than SA's version along with being more intricate. To make it the size some seem to have wanted would have meant either a big hit to detail or an exclusion of a lot of the out of town areas or the game taking even longer to come out. At least the country side won't be as dead as San Andreas's and looks to have at least a meaningful town or two (or more) that are much larger than what we saw in SA in terms of towns. Then again, there's those who complain about the lack of LV and SF, both of which were very underwhelming in terms of size and variety, especially in Las Venturas's case, at least San Fierro had hills.

Edited July 19, 2013 by PHOENIXZERO

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

I can't help but think GKP is getting a raw deal here. From what I've seen he never post abusive replies to anyone who posts something sensible and civil.

GKP has been calling people idiots and what not for months(don't ask me how I know that). It's almost like he has made a deal with the mods here. I've seen people permanently banned for less. This guy has so much sh*t on his plate that I'm surprised he hasn't been banned months ago.

[SuccessPastaTime]

 

Seriously GKP why can't you just accept the fact that like every company, R* are catering towards the majority, and the majority are happy with a city the size of LS? Are you saying that you are better than these people, because you have higher standards? It's a city in a videogame, the 'majority' don't really care anyway.

You have hit the nail on the head Kesta - my standards , in as much as what I want ARE at the higher end. I am used to playing in extremely expansive environments on the PC ( ARMA series) the lowest common denominator is the target market. The 'casual' gamers. I cant expect more.

The fact that you are used to ARMA is rather ironic when you consider that a lot of Arma games have massive countryside areas, and yet you refuse to acknowledge the one in GTA V.

 

EDIT: Alright you finally did anyway.

Exactly. Arma isn't even a good game, all it has is good graphics. The map was pretty much easy as f*ck to make. It's mostly countryside.

I know this is off topic, but I completely disagree with that, the game is one of the most complex military simulators that exists. The military used the first game in the series as a training tool.

 

Sorry, just had to put that out there.

[Choco Taco]

Assuming the horizontal placement of the city on the blueprint is correct...

 

 

 

San Andreas is 13.9 square miles.

[Rockstar Cake]

If I may, here's something OT:

 

I've noticed in a lot of maps that use the Los Santos blueprint map sections, particularly ones like Fido's map and CVG's map, there are a lot of the smaller side streets missing, along with trails and things of that sort. I went through Gimp and spent about an hour analyzing this and comparing screenshots and all, and have everything highlighted here for all to use. I'm going to be doing some more work on it, as I'm a bit sketchy on the highways running through the city, as it seems like every map has a variation in where the on and off ramps are downtown, and the river(s) running through Los Santos seem to vary from map to map as well, so I'll be doing some more work there. I'm making a rough sketch-up of the map itself here, using the "5x LC" measurement for adequate countryside space. I'll post it here and on the Mapping Los Santos thread when I finish it. Anywho, here's the city:

 

[ZeeKid2k10]

If I may, here's something OT:

 

I've noticed in a lot of maps that use the Los Santos blueprint map sections, particularly ones like Fido's map and CVG's map, there are a lot of the smaller side streets missing, along with trails and things of that sort. I went through Gimp and spent about an hour analyzing this and comparing screenshots and all, and have everything highlighted here for all to use. I'm going to be doing some more work on it, as I'm a bit sketchy on the highways running through the city, as it seems like every map has a variation in where the on and off ramps are downtown, and the river(s) running through Los Santos seem to vary from map to map as well, so I'll be doing some more work there. I'm making a rough sketch-up of the map itself here, using the "5x LC" measurement for adequate countryside space. I'll post it here and on the Mapping Los Santos thread when I finish it. Anywho, here's the city:

 

[kesta195]

Could someone draw a ring around the area on the blueprint map that represents the area in that satellite view?

[GTAaLEX117]

 

Could someone draw a ring around the area on the blueprint map that represents the area in that satellite view?

Why a ring?

This is a better representation of the area: http://i1275.photobucket.com/albums/y454/g...zps0863f74b.jpg

[Ferocious Banger]

Talking about details, I think some are forgetting how detailed Liberty City actually was. I just can't see R* layering this new, massive map with as much amount of detail as seen in LC. Just can't. Sure LS looks detailed, but please have a look at Bohan, for example.

 

The first trailer looked detailed. Very detailed. But the first trailer had more trees and in general, looked better too.

Edited July 20, 2013 by Ferocious Banger

[YouthGamer]

@Ferocious Banger: Thats what I keep thinking when playing Gta 4 and see so much destructible environments and interactions with peds

 

 

Oh and I swear if that kid posts here again....

Edited July 20, 2013 by YouthGamer

[Ferocious Banger]

@Ferocious Banger: Thats what I keep thinking when playing Gta 4 and see so much destructible environments and interactions with peds

 

 

Oh and I swear if that kid posts here again....

Which...kid?

 

--

Seriously, I ran GTA IV at full settings and guess what? It is on par with the Chicago of Watch_Dogs ( from what we've seen )!

[josephene123]

@Ferocious Banger: Thats what I keep thinking when playing Gta 4 and see so much destructible environments and interactions with peds

 

 

Oh and I swear if that kid posts here again....

Which...kid?

 

--

Seriously, I ran GTA IV at full settings and guess what? It is on par with the Chicago of Watch_Dogs ( from what we've seen )!

I don't get it with you and your posts about Watch_Dogs' detail? Care to explain?

[Ferocious Banger]

@Ferocious Banger: Thats what I keep thinking when playing Gta 4 and see so much destructible environments and interactions with peds

 

 

Oh and I swear if that kid posts here again....

Which...kid?

 

--

Seriously, I ran GTA IV at full settings and guess what? It is on par with the Chicago of Watch_Dogs ( from what we've seen )!

I don't get it with you and your posts about Watch_Dogs' detail? Care to explain?

What I mean is that, even though we've seen Chicago to be highly detailed, GTA IV - five year old PS3 game - rivals its detail comfortably!

 

And yes, Watch_Dogs world is insanely detailed.

[Eutyphro]

I just can't see R* layering this new, massive map with as much amount of detail as seen in LC. Just can't.

I really can't see why not. R* has always upped their game with every new GTA and will do the same thing this time.

[josephene123]

And yes, Watch_Dogs world is insanely detailed.

This is the part that I mean. I just don't see it. It looks standard-ly detailed for a video game city to me...

[bakerach]

And yes, Watch_Dogs world is insanely detailed.

This is the part that I mean. I just don't see it. It looks standard-ly detailed for a video game city to me...

The environmental details/flourishes as well as the numerous npc animations and activities they've shown so far are pretty impressive- but they look just as good, if not better, in what we've seen of V, and that's running on current-gen tech.

[josephene123]

And yes, Watch_Dogs world is insanely detailed.

This is the part that I mean. I just don't see it. It looks standard-ly detailed for a video game city to me...

The environmental details/flourishes as well as the numerous npc animations and activities they've shown so far are pretty impressive- but they look just as good, if not better, in what we've seen of V, and that's running on current-gen tech.

I guess I'm being harsh when I say standard-ly detailed. I don't know, I'm just not blown away by the activities that we've seen, and Chicago looks a grey and boring city. The only thing that really impresses me is the graphics, but on current gen I imagine they'll not look as good as GTA.

[GTAaLEX117]

 

Talking about details, I think some are forgetting how detailed Liberty City actually was. I just can't see R* layering this new, massive map with as much amount of detail as seen in LC. Just can't. Sure LS looks detailed, but please have a look at Bohan, for example.

 

The first trailer looked detailed. Very detailed. But the first trailer had more trees and in general, looked better too.

I really can't understand what you are talking about. V seems to be a huge improvement over LC, especially when it comes to environmental details. Everything from the streets, to the buildings and to the mountains, they all seem incredibly detailed up-close.

Regarding Watch Dogs, look at the recent trailers (since those were taken on the PS4, and not the old ones which were rendered on a PC) and you'll see a pretty big drop in detail.

[Ferocious Banger]

Talking about details, I think some are forgetting how detailed Liberty City actually was. I just can't see R* layering this new, massive map with as much amount of detail as seen in LC. Just can't. Sure LS looks detailed, but please have a look at Bohan, for example.

 

The first trailer looked detailed. Very detailed. But the first trailer had more trees and in general, looked better too.

I really can't understand what you are talking about. V seems to be a huge improvement over LC, especially when it comes to environmental details. Everything from the streets, to the buildings and to the mountains, they all seem incredibly detailed up-close.

Regarding Watch Dogs, look at the recent trailers (since those were taken on the PS4, and not the old ones which were rendered on a PC) and you'll see a pretty big drop in detail.

I'm setting myself not to be disappointed.

But I can feel it being incredibly detailed for a world this big.

 

 

I guess I'm having oneof those moments deffpony had a few pages back.

[2019Redifiv/2020Modifiv]

 

Talking about details, I think some are forgetting how detailed Liberty City actually was. I just can't see R* layering this new, massive map with as much amount of detail as seen in LC. Just can't. Sure LS looks detailed, but please have a look at Bohan, for example.

 

The first trailer looked detailed. Very detailed. But the first trailer had more trees and in general, looked better too.

I really can't understand what you are talking about. V seems to be a huge improvement over LC, especially when it comes to environmental details. Everything from the streets, to the buildings and to the mountains, they all seem incredibly detailed up-close.

Regarding Watch Dogs, look at the recent trailers (since those were taken on the PS4, and not the old ones which were rendered on a PC) and you'll see a pretty big drop in detail.

I'm setting myself not to be disappointed.

But I can feel it being incredibly detailed for a world this big.

 

 

I guess I'm having oneof those moments deffpony had a few pages back.

Ok, cheer up time, Banger and other semi-pessimists :0)

 

Los Santos comes off a LOT more detailed than Liberty City.

Just going by the amount and variety of the clutter and interactive objects in the city,

Los Santos is far superior to Liberty City.

 

Also, when you examine the trailers and screenshots closely, it becomes

evident that a vast majority of the buildings will be scalable from

the ground. There is an abundance of ladders and small climbable

walls.

 

Furthermore rememeber to include the highest count of cars yet coupled with

5 times the ped variety of Liberty City.

 

Even the buildings seem more detailed than in Liberty City.

The mapping thread has revealed the presence

of a hundred or more known Los Angeles "landmarks".

The infrastructure is also a lot more complex with more lanes and a less rigid grid of roads.

 

Lastly, the diversity of the districts represented in this rendition of Los Angeles

also surpasses the variety of Liberty City as well. The difference between the

very upscale hills of Richmond and the low income graffiti-ridden homes of

Grove Street are more stark and striking, than any comparison between the

neighbourhoods in Liberty City.

 

And all this is just the tip of the iceberg of Los Santos atmosphere.

 

Add to all this, how the new lightning enriches every scene, both exterior

and interior. Or what about the new cloth physics and the .....

 

Well, let me just put it like this :

 

The ferris wheel in Los Santos is working and open for business

[[enforcA]]

 

Just to help get the thread back to the way it was, these were the last valid scales and methods posted around here:

 

Taco's: http://i.imgur.com/ZeFJsZb.jpg

Mine: http://i1173.photobucket.com/albums/r597/AlexXD94/MPexgr.jpg

Deff's: http://i.imgur.com/YCv4BCD.gif

Al's: http://i.imgur.com/9YomcFK.jpg

Argon's: http://i.imgur.com/SfoLzRhl.jpg

 

Continues from: http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtop...entry1062792126

 

n4c's:

 

 

(wanted to double-check by using 2 different places (Bohan & Dukes), but since 1 place already took so long, i decided to upload it already, i'll do the double-check later; the above GTA V/IV map comparison is based on the tennis courts of Bohan; ignore the scale bars, since they are overlayed with parts of the Liberty City map)

[brian.]

I'm telling you right now that the entire city is no more than 1.25 miles wide at any given extreme. That is the maximum.

 

So those "1m, 1km" lines, are way too short, because according the image above, it's like 3 miles wide - and that is not the case. It is 1.25 miles squared (it's an approximation, but it is definitely not 3 or 4 km wide - it is only 2km wide. 1.25 miles (mark my words, this is the correct scale to within a 1/4 miles too big, not 1/4 mile too small)

 

The entirely of the city itself is between 1800 and 2000 meters. Scale your maps to that and you'll see it's accurate

 

 

 

I won't be surprised if grids are 1000x900 meters.

Edited July 20, 2013 by brian.

[josephene123]

 

I'm telling you right now that the entire city is no more than 1.25 miles wide at any given extreme. That is the maximum.

 

So those "1m, 1km" lines, are way too short, because according the image above, it's like 3 miles wide - and that is not the case. It is 1.25 miles squared (it's an approximation, but it is definitely not 3 or 4 km wide - it is only 2km wide. 1.25 miles (mark my words, this is the correct scale to within a 1/4 miles too big, not 1/4 mile too small)

 

The entirely of the city itself is between 1800 and 2000 meters. Scale your maps to that and you'll see it's accurate 

 

 

 

I won't be surprised if grids are 1000x900 meters.

You're saying you think the whole city is a max of around 3-4 squared kilometers?

Edited July 21, 2013 by josephene123

[uJhatafart00]

Oh gosh, I left this topic at page 80 or so, and now is here...

Almost 350 pages in 3 months, that's unbelievable o.O

[Ferocious Banger]

This is the alleged map of Chicago in WatchDogs, by the way. How does LS compare to this? Any calculators online now?

 

E:Holy mother of page stretch! How am I supposed to resize this?!

[Ferocious Banger]

Anyone? Come one, guys!

[TheDeaconBosco]

Just use the link if you have to.