LotusRIP Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 If the map is to be an island, and we're in the state of San Andreas, does that mean the state spans across open waters? Or does this mean the land will be locked on at least 1 side to make it feel like there's more to San Andreas than just an island with a city? Bit confused about this... I guess it would be weird if they make references to other cities in the state like Las Venturas when we're surrounded by endless ocean - it feels like any referenced cities such as Las Venturas which is a desert-based city should be in the desert neighbouring the other side of Blaine County or something. (NOT in the game, but you know, to add credibility to the fact there are other non-playable cities out there.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic_Al Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 It's not that different than the GTASA version of San Andreas being disconnected from the rest of the United States or from Vice City being isolated from the rest of Florida or of Liberty City and Alderney either being whole states (which would be illogically small) or islands off an unseen mainland. In GTAV the "zoom level" is we have a few counties of the state of San Andreas and the unseen parts of the state and country and world exist only by reference in in-game media. The geography of where the rest of the state/country is doesn't make sense when you think about it abstractly, but it's still better to have the game world be an island because it doesn't put an unrealistic boundary in your face. An island is physically realistic even if it's illogical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Sunshine Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 I hope they do what San Andreas did. IE - Regenerating Sea, not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I don't think they'd be able to achieve this with land, so it's probably going to have to be an island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73duster Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Every GTA has been on an island. I don't see how this one will be any different, especially considering how we will be able to fly. RDR was able to use land borders, but that was easy to do without having planes in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmos23 Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 I hope they do what San Andreas did. IE - Regenerating Sea, not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I don't think they'd be able to achieve this with land, so it's probably going to have to be an island. What? So if I'm playing IV and I swim for hours to one side of the map I get that message? I didn't know this. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeafMetal Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 It's not the same San Andreas as 2004's San Andreas. It's in another universe, so it's different. I still 100% believe it's set in San Andreas, but they were afraid to call it that beause of the lack of LV and SF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazabaza21 Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Its set on a island Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintsrow Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Maybe the entire GTAV map will be an island in the middle of a gigantic kidney-shaped pool. Certainly this is one of the big mysteries of GTAV -- with endless ocean being likely, but not very consistent with the big-picture geography of Calif and western US. We could see some super tall mountains that could block the highest-flying plane, but that seems unlikely also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaFoam Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I'm pretty sure this was just in multiplayer, not single player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Sunshine Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I'm pretty sure this was just in multiplayer, not single player. I swear it's in both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magic_Al Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 It's not the same San Andreas as 2004's San Andreas. It's in another universe, so it's different. I still 100% believe it's set in San Andreas, but they were afraid to call it that beause of the lack of LV and SF. The fact that Los Santos is in the state of San Andreas is true in both universes, but you're right that Rockstar doesn't want to emphasize the name San Andreas in describing the game because it would confuse people by setting expectations in relation to GTA San Andreas. That's why they said Southern California in the original announcement even though in the game universe it will be San Andreas not California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaFoam Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I'm pretty sure this was just in multiplayer, not single player. I swear it's in both. I could be wrong! But I'm pretty sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LotusRIP Posted April 18, 2013 Author Share Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) It's not the same San Andreas as 2004's San Andreas. It's in another universe, so it's different. I still 100% believe it's set in San Andreas, but they were afraid to call it that beause of the lack of LV and SF. The fact that Los Santos is in the state of San Andreas is true in both universes, but you're right that Rockstar doesn't want to emphasize the name San Andreas in describing the game because it would confuse people by setting expectations in relation to GTA San Andreas. That's why they said Southern California in the original announcement even though in the game universe it will be San Andreas not California. Yep, and looking at this tells us we're in San Andreas: Not sure if people get my point. Ofcourse it seems that the map will be an island. But how are they going to convince us to think that the rest of San Andreas still exists - beyond open waters? Just seems a little fishy. I won't be terribly convinced there's a Las Venturas out there in the ocean somewhere, in another desert. It worked fine for Liberty City and Vice City etc, because there were no other cities in previous games, but for San Andreas not so much - because we've explored the old map in the past and all know San Fierro and Las Venturas is out there somewhere. Has there even been any references to other cities within Liberty State or Vice State? Edited April 18, 2013 by LotusRIP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Darko Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I'm pretty sure this was just in multiplayer, not single player. I swear it's in both. I've flown a helicopter and driven a boat through those waters for like an hour before in singleplayer, so if it's there then it seems that it takes a while to get to that boundary. @LotusRIP I wouldn't worry about that too much. Technically none of the games actually take place on islands, the cities are actually connected to the main land, but in the game's representation of that world, it is an island because that's the most natural and least restrictive way to create boundaries for the game world. The world is meant to be feel 'complete'. Edited April 18, 2013 by Mr. Darko Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStarr31 Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 It's not the same San Andreas as 2004's San Andreas. It's in another universe, so it's different. I still 100% believe it's set in San Andreas, but they were afraid to call it that beause of the lack of LV and SF. The fact that Los Santos is in the state of San Andreas is true in both universes, but you're right that Rockstar doesn't want to emphasize the name San Andreas in describing the game because it would confuse people by setting expectations in relation to GTA San Andreas. That's why they said Southern California in the original announcement even though in the game universe it will be San Andreas not California. Yep, and looking at this tells us we're in San Andreas: Not sure if people get my point. Ofcourse it seems that the map will be an island. But how are they going to convince us to think that the rest of San Andreas still exists - beyond open waters? Just seems a little fishy. I won't be terribly convinced there's a Las Venturas out there in the ocean somewhere, in another desert. It worked fine for Liberty City and Vice City etc, because there were no other cities in previous games, but for San Andreas not so much - because we've explored the old map in the past and all know San Fierro and Las Venturas is out there somewhere. Has there even been any references to other cities within Liberty State or Vice State? Yes actually; Liberty State has: Liberty City, The Carraways, Carcer City, Florida has: Vice City & Cottonmouth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocoFrosty Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I'm pretty sure this was just in multiplayer, not single player. I swear it's in both. It's only in multiplayer. 100% positive. Edit: Did some searching around and saw you are the first response on this thread from 1 1/2 years ago. I had never seen a video of someone actually going out to sea for that long. I'll have to try this for myself. Edited April 18, 2013 by ChocoFrosty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DODI3OG Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 It's not that different than the GTASA version of San Andreas being disconnected from the rest of the United States or from Vice City being isolated from the rest of Florida or of Liberty City and Alderney either being whole states (which would be illogically small) or islands off an unseen mainland. In GTAV the "zoom level" is we have a few counties of the state of San Andreas and the unseen parts of the state and country and world exist only by reference in in-game media. The geography of where the rest of the state/country is doesn't make sense when you think about it abstractly, but it's still better to have the game world be an island because it doesn't put an unrealistic boundary in your face. An island is physically realistic even if it's illogical This. Why would people keep thinking about an "infinite land" border when it's very useless and boring? It's such a waste of data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adriaan Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 But how are they going to convince us to think that the rest of San Andreas still exists - beyond open waters? Just seems a little fishy. "Seems fishy", hah. Nice inadvertent pun? Most likely the correct design choice to get around that would be to use mountains. Think of the mountains along the northern border of Las Venturas in GTA: San Andreas. To have something similar on the eastern coast of GTAV's map would make sense, right? Game play design choices would supersede this complete "endless" feeling - and which is why you're more likely going to end up with something similar to previous GTA titles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chukkles Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) It's not the same San Andreas as 2004's San Andreas. It's in another universe, so it's different. I still 100% believe it's set in San Andreas, but they were afraid to call it that beause of the lack of LV and SF. The fact that Los Santos is in the state of San Andreas is true in both universes, but you're right that Rockstar doesn't want to emphasize the name San Andreas in describing the game because it would confuse people by setting expectations in relation to GTA San Andreas. That's why they said Southern California in the original announcement even though in the game universe it will be San Andreas not California. Yep, and looking at this tells us we're in San Andreas: Not sure if people get my point. Ofcourse it seems that the map will be an island. But how are they going to convince us to think that the rest of San Andreas still exists - beyond open waters? Just seems a little fishy. I won't be terribly convinced there's a Las Venturas out there in the ocean somewhere, in another desert. It worked fine for Liberty City and Vice City etc, because there were no other cities in previous games, but for San Andreas not so much - because we've explored the old map in the past and all know San Fierro and Las Venturas is out there somewhere. Has there even been any references to other cities within Liberty State or Vice State? There doesn't really have to be anything out there. Wasn't Shoreside Vale replaced with Alderney? Edited April 18, 2013 by Chukkles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squidhead Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 How about having mountains along the map boundery, this will feel like its not an island, That's the only way i can see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killdrivetheftvehicle Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Maybe the entire GTAV map will be an island in the middle of a gigantic kidney-shaped pool. If it was big enough they wouldn't call it a pool (the dutch know what I'm talking about). @OP: What was the confusing part of LC in SA and people coming from VC in SA? It's the same thing, only different cities in the gta universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Santos County Sheriff Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Heres another one - if its on an island why does it have interstate highways? The answer is: BECAUSE ITS A DAMN VIDEOGAME! Just go with it and stop over analyzing sh*t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrU Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Maybe Las Venturas and San Fierro will be DLC's, and when buying them you unlock an unvisible barrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killdrivetheftvehicle Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Maybe Las Venturas and San Fierro will be DLC's, and when buying them you unlock an unvisible barrier. Very funny! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocoFrosty Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 not some stupid "Turn back or suffer the consequences" message and then you die like in IV. I'm pretty sure this was just in multiplayer, not single player. I swear it's in both. It's only in multiplayer. 100% positive. Edit: Did some searching around and saw you are the first response on this thread from 1 1/2 years ago. I had never seen a video of someone actually going out to sea for that long. I'll have to try this for myself. Update: So I just flew out to sea in an Annihilator. It took around 8 minutes until I started losing bits of health. I turned around, flew back towards the city, and was able to stop my loss of life. Then I flew away from the city again until I continued to lose life and ultimately died. While this is very different from what happens in multiplayer (in which you explode after a very short distance), I wasn't actually aware that any kind of death would occur in single player as a consequence for flying too far out to sea. I don't see this as a problem, though. 8 minutes at full speed in an Annihilator is plenty of distance for 'endless ocean', in my opinion. I wouldn't mind if it stays the same in GTA V. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LotusRIP Posted April 18, 2013 Author Share Posted April 18, 2013 But how are they going to convince us to think that the rest of San Andreas still exists - beyond open waters? Just seems a little fishy. "Seems fishy", hah. Nice inadvertent pun? Most likely the correct design choice to get around that would be to use mountains. Think of the mountains along the northern border of Las Venturas in GTA: San Andreas. To have something similar on the eastern coast of GTAV's map would make sense, right? Thought you'd love the pun! But yeah... never thought of that. The mountains north of LV did give an illusion that there was "more out there". Until you climb across and fall off the edge of the map ofcourse. But I guess the effect was there... I'm betting now the same will happen in V. on the North+East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gta5freemode4eva Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 I know on some of the leaked info (some of which has come true) it said about there being an endless desert and an endless ocean... maybe the last 2 in game miles repeats itself over and over? I'm not saying this 'leaked' info is correct btw. It keep thinking that it may feel odd being an island but then GTA 4 didn't so I don't mind if it is endless ocean/desert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheatz/Trickz Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 It will be an island because its a game. The dialogue will still refer to the rest of the US because in the story it is there. We can't see it because its a game. Games have rules. Like NYC, Liberty City is right next to the the mainland, but its not in the game physically, just in narrative. The characters can see it, The Lost could ride off into the sunset, along the unseen bridge out of Liberty City that lies beyond the limitions of a game. Los Santos will appear as an island city with wasteland around it, then water, and then the unseen rest of San Andreas and the US. It's a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonRenemy Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 (edited) How are people imagining mountains will work?! It's utterly insane. Yeah ok to imagine for a second that they create a mountain that's juuuuuuust a tiny bit too high for a plane or chopper (which would need to be hilariously huge and embarassing looking) but then what? What happens when you try to go around it? Think about it logically, think of how the map would LOOK. It would be incredibly stupid. RDR worked because you couldn't get more than 10 feet off the ground from any given point that you were riding/standing. This is GTA where we have heckyloppers and now planes. Mountains won't work because it'll look retarded. EDIT: And ok let's imagine the game is mountain-locked the entire way around (as if we're in a basin).. but again imagine how tall the mountains would need to be, it would be stupid and pointless, especially as we know the actual city of Los Santos has a coastline... so... what... lots of water and then BAM, huge wall? ARRGHHH stop the madness. It's a game, you're all making my brain hurt. Island. ISLAND. Edited April 18, 2013 by JonRenemy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkDayz Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 It's not the same San Andreas as 2004's San Andreas. It's in another universe, so it's different. Both Los Santos' are based on Los Angeles, but now more realised as an isolated city. That's the only difference. The people who inhabit it are different of course, but that's not geographical appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now