emelen Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 The GTA V map will be about 12.91 miles x 10.01 miles... Before I get shot down in flames, here comes the science bit.. Using R*'s own figure of an explorable land mass that is 3.5 times the size of the RDR (Red Dead Redemption) map, I arrived at the above figure using the following: The train tunnel above and between The Hanging Rock and Hennigan's Stead is approx. 1823ft long (I know because I was sad enough to walk it! I had to start a new game before the in-game stats turned from feet to miles and headed straight there. I used the tunnel because its the nearest thing to a straight line that has no obstructions, so my figures wouldn't be skewed by deviations, like avoiding buildings, rivers, tress etc.. The tunnel itself has a very minor deviation which I doubt will have too much impact on the figures.. Anyway.. I took before and after figures from the start and end of the tunnel. I then measured the tunnel on the paper map included with the game. This is almost, if not exactly, 5cm. Thus, our scale is 5cm = 1823ft. The paper RDR map is approx. 53.5cm x 41.5cm at it's widest, explorable points. In the real world, 1 mile = 5280ft. To work out how many 'tunnels' will fit into this real world mile, I divided 5280ft by 1823ft = 2.896 tunnels. So if 2.896 tunnels = 1 real mile, then 5cm of RDR map x 2.896 = 14.48cm, equates to 1 mile. The RDR map is approx. 53.5cm x 41.5cm. Divide these dimensions by 14.48 and you get a RDR map in real world figures of 3.69miles x 2.86miles, at the widest points. R*'s GTAV map @ 3.5 x RDR's map = 12.91 miles x 10.01 of explorable land mass.. R*'s GTAV map @ 5.0 x RDR's map = 18.45 miles x 14.30 of total map area inc. the sea.. My figures are NOT official, confirmed figures, quote them at you own peril. I'm only posting this here for a bit of fun, please DO NOT take it too seriously. And R*, I love you... ;-) xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Mario Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Ya know.. You guys use a lot of math stuff which I don't understand. I won't know what the actual map size will be until the actual release day of the game and I figure it all out myself. Not even a view of the official map will tell me how big it actually is because I can't get it.. Lol.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skyfamster Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) r should announce the map to avoid the gamers to do such vain work In a previous thread a gamer walk along the bridge inIV ,and now you do the RDR Edited June 5, 2013 by skyfamster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick The Mullet Man Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 That is big I reckon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AceHigh11 Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Bad calculations... You multiplied the height and width dimensions by 3.5 each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emelen Posted June 5, 2013 Author Share Posted June 5, 2013 Bad calculations... You multiplied the height and width dimensions by 3.5 each. How is it bad math? The length and width of the RDR map x R*'s 3.5 figure.. If you multiply the size of a 2D object, then BOTH the length and width have to be multiplied, right? In this case, both sets of figures by the same amounts; 3.5 for land mass and 5.0 for the latter inc the sea.. Do I not understand you or do you not understand me? ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedDagger Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) Bad calculations... You multiplied the height and width dimensions by 3.5 each. How is it bad math? The length and width of the RDR map x R*'s 3.5 figure.. If you multiply the size of a 2D object, then BOTH the length and width have to be multiplied, right? In this case, both sets of figures by the same amounts; 3.5 for land mass and 5.0 for the latter inc the sea.. Do I not understand you or do you not understand me? ;-) ...actually, if a square were to increase by 2 in what you're saying, it's actually increased by a factor of 4. You times the final area of RDR by 3.5 - what you're doing is multiplying it by 3.5 squared. If you multiply the size of a 2D object, then BOTH the length and width have to be multiplied, right? Nope, only one. Edited June 5, 2013 by RedDaggerXL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakydude20 Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Bad calculations... You multiplied the height and width dimensions by 3.5 each. How is it bad math? The length and width of the RDR map x R*'s 3.5 figure.. If you multiply the size of a 2D object, then BOTH the length and width have to be multiplied, right? In this case, both sets of figures by the same amounts; 3.5 for land mass and 5.0 for the latter inc the sea.. Do I not understand you or do you not understand me? ;-) I think he is trying to say this: If you have a square and you multiply the width it by 3, you're gonna have a 3 times wider square right? If you multiply the length by 3, you're gonna have a 3 times higher square. So in the end, the square is multiplied by 3x3=9 I hope you get it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bantri Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 The GTA V map will be about 12.91 miles x 10.01 miles... Before I get shot down in flames, here comes the science bit.. Using R*'s own figure of an explorable land mass that is 3.5 times the size of the RDR (Red Dead Redemption) map, I arrived at the above figure using the following: The train tunnel above and between The Hanging Rock and Hennigan's Stead is approx. 1823ft long (I know because I was sad enough to walk it! I had to start a new game before the in-game stats turned from feet to miles and headed straight there. I used the tunnel because its the nearest thing to a straight line that has no obstructions, so my figures wouldn't be skewed by deviations, like avoiding buildings, rivers, tress etc.. The tunnel itself has a very minor deviation which I doubt will have too much impact on the figures.. Anyway.. I took before and after figures from the start and end of the tunnel. I then measured the tunnel on the paper map included with the game. This is almost, if not exactly, 5cm. Thus, our scale is 5cm = 1823ft. The paper RDR map is approx. 53.5cm x 41.5cm at it's widest, explorable points. In the real world, 1 mile = 5280ft. To work out how many 'tunnels' will fit into this real world mile, I divided 5280ft by 1823ft = 2.896 tunnels. So if 2.896 tunnels = 1 real mile, then 5cm of RDR map x 2.896 = 14.48cm, equates to 1 mile. The RDR map is approx. 53.5cm x 41.5cm. Divide these dimensions by 14.48 and you get a RDR map in real world figures of 3.69miles x 2.86miles, at the widest points. R*'s GTAV map @ 3.5 x RDR's map = 12.91 miles x 10.01 of explorable land mass.. R*'s GTAV map @ 5.0 x RDR's map = 18.45 miles x 14.30 of total map area inc. the sea.. My figures are NOT official, confirmed figures, quote them at you own peril. I'm only posting this here for a bit of fun, please DO NOT take it too seriously. And R*, I love you... ;-) xx *sigh* For one... This is not science. It's math Second... You are wrong. A video game is not to scale with another video game, and is not to scale with real life. Walking the tunnel to find the feet is inaccurate. Then you can't compare video game world to video game world. While they are made from the same company and same engine, they can still be off from each other. Here is a much simpler solution. The map will be either half, or 1/4th the size of the Special edition map. Considering that map will be scaled down, most likely 1 inch for 1/4th a mile. So the map is 26 inches or whatever, divided by 4. That makes the map will be about 6-7 or so miles wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emelen Posted June 5, 2013 Author Share Posted June 5, 2013 uft.. i did say it was only for a bit of fun.. lol.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Backer Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 You say the map is 10.01 x 12.91? So you think the area is 129.23 square miles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AceHigh11 Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 uft.. i did say it was only for a bit of fun.. lol.. It's kinda a trick by R*. The entire landmass of GTA V being 3.5 times as big as RDR isn't THAT big. That means if you scale the RDR map by 1.87, you get there. A lot of people fall into this trap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fail_At_GTA Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 -sigh- I wonder when people will understand that GTA 5 will be somewhere around 25sq miles, give or take a couple miles. This has been proven several times on different threads, including the mapping one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exmpletree Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 how about meters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emelen Posted June 5, 2013 Author Share Posted June 5, 2013 doh!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Backer Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 -sigh- I wonder when people will understand that GTA 5 will be somewhere around 25sq miles, give or take a couple miles. This has been proven several times on different threads, including the mapping one. Why 25? Rockstar said before SA was 13.9 and since most people here seem to think RDR is bigger it couldnt be only 25 when you factor in that they also said that it would be 3.5 times RDR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenpennyisplainevil Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) One fault: you multiplied 3.59 and 2.86 by 3.5, while you should multiply the outcome by 3.5 So the answer would be 35,94 square mi. BTW, good job op You ended up at a sq mi of approx. 10 with RDR, which should be spot on since RDR (explorable) is a bit smaller than SA. Edited June 5, 2013 by tenpennyisplainevil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fail_At_GTA Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 -sigh- I wonder when people will understand that GTA 5 will be somewhere around 25sq miles, give or take a couple miles. This has been proven several times on different threads, including the mapping one. Why 25? Rockstar said before SA was 13.9 and since most people here seem to think RDR is bigger it couldnt be only 25 when you factor in that they also said that it would be 3.5 times RDR. San Andreas is 13.9sq miles, GTA IV is something like 3.6sq miles (not including water), and RDR is highly debated, but the best mapping results I've seen have resulted in the playable area being something like 7sq miles. Add those together and you get 24.5sq miles. Rockstar also said there's room to spare. Now 3.5 x 7 would also be 24.5sq miles. Again, its most likely not exactly that size, it could be 3.3x or 3.7x, its an estimate. If I'm not mistaken, one of the articles (I really have no clue which one, sorry) said the map was pretty square-ish, like San Andreas. That would give us a map that is roughly 5 miles x 5 miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emelen Posted June 5, 2013 Author Share Posted June 5, 2013 ahhh.. now i see it.. i accept my bad math.. sorry.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Backer Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 -sigh- I wonder when people will understand that GTA 5 will be somewhere around 25sq miles, give or take a couple miles. This has been proven several times on different threads, including the mapping one. Why 25? Rockstar said before SA was 13.9 and since most people here seem to think RDR is bigger it couldnt be only 25 when you factor in that they also said that it would be 3.5 times RDR. San Andreas is 13.9sq miles, GTA IV is something like 3.6sq miles (not including water), and RDR is highly debated, but the best mapping results I've seen have resulted in the playable area being something like 7sq miles. Add those together and you get 24.5sq miles. Rockstar also said there's room to spare. Now 3.5 x 7 would also be 24.5sq miles. Again, its most likely not exactly that size, it could be 3.3x or 3.7x, its an estimate. If I'm not mistaken, one of the articles (I really have no clue which one, sorry) said the map was pretty square-ish, like San Andreas. That would give us a map that is roughly 5 miles x 5 miles. Wait..... Holy sh*t....... So im not the only person that knows RDR is actually smaller than SA??? For some reason 90% of people here think its the other way around. Personally i know ill be happy with whatever the size is. I still play IV and the detail and size of that city still amazes me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dxbrandon Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 ahhh.. now i see it.. i accept my bad math.. sorry.. Lol sorry for what? Nobodys right or wrong buddy. Nobody really know's the size of Gta V map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenpennyisplainevil Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Just came to my mind, if V is 35 sq mi and IV (=LS size) was only 3.6, the rest is going to be 10 times bigger than LS. That's a huge amount of countryside, they could easily have built another city, but now we're stuck with this overly big patch of countryside... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDredMan Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 *Click my sig* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 A video game is not to scale with another video game, and is not to scale with real life. Walking the tunnel to find the feet is inaccurate. Then you can't compare video game world to video game world. While they are made from the same company and same engine, they can still be off from each other. Although the calculations in the first post are way off, what you said is not necessarily correct either. The scale is most likely the same if the game's based on the same engine as another videogame, it's absurd to think that a developer would bother to invent an entirely new measurement system and that within a console cycle; and the fact that a new console cycle starts, doesn't really suggest that a new system will be invented either. In fact, current Rockstar titles still use the same system as the 3D-era GTAs! We are talking about an openworld game here that represents the real world somehow, and not some kind of highly fictional videogame that has absolutely nothing to do with the real world whatsoever. If you are in the position to do proper estimations and calculations, you can scale everything yourself. Then you can even compare the map size of Just Cause 2 with GTA IV, for instance. The most important thing of the map size estimations are the methods; if your methods aren't accurate, then you cannot expect an accurate result. GTAForums Crew Chat Thread - The Sharks Chat Thread - Leone Family Mafia Chat Thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
October16th Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 ahhh.. now i see it.. i accept my bad math.. sorry.. You lose the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don_Corleone Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Couldn't care less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvin Backer Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 A video game is not to scale with another video game, and is not to scale with real life. Walking the tunnel to find the feet is inaccurate. Then you can't compare video game world to video game world. While they are made from the same company and same engine, they can still be off from each other. Although the calculations in the first post are way off, what you said is not necessarily correct either. The scale is most likely the same if the game's based on the same engine as another videogame, it's absurd to think that a developer would bother to invent an entirely new measurement system and that within a console cycle; and the fact that a new console cycle starts, doesn't really suggest that a new system will be invented either. In fact, current Rockstar titles still use the same system as the 3D-era GTAs! We are talking about an openworld game here that represents the real world somehow, and not some kind of highly fictional videogame that has absolutely nothing to do with the real world whatsoever. If you are in the position to do proper estimations and calculations, you can scale everything yourself. Then you can even compare the map size of Just Cause 2 with GTA IV, for instance. The most important thing of the map size estimations are the methods; if your methods aren't accurate, then you cannot expect an accurate result. I still dont understand why people dont just use the information from the stats menu when you pause the game. It measures how many feet you have traveled. Ive seen everything from some guy using taxis as rulers to people comparing how fast the characters run to get a distance. Also people use 2 buildings from 2 different games and say theyre the same height. All that stuff is so dumb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine Head Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 Couldn't care less. Best post in this thread so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombie elvis Posted June 5, 2013 Share Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) Your measurements sound good but the problem is it's not clear if they meant RDR is the full rectangle, the explorable bounding rectangle, or the explorable area inside that rectangle. The walkable area in RDR only around 50% of what you used. edit: The real problem is your calculations are wrong, you're multiplying the dimensions when you should be multiplying the areas. 5 x 1milex1mile = 5 square miles, not 25 square miles. Edited June 5, 2013 by zombie elvis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emelen Posted June 5, 2013 Author Share Posted June 5, 2013 I still dont understand why people dont just use the information from the stats menu when you pause the game. It measures how many feet you have traveled. i did use the in-game stats, thats what i said.. before i walked the tunnel, i noted down the 'distance travelled by foot' figure of 1262ft. i then walked the tunnel and checked again and the figure had increased by 1823ft to a new 'distance travelled by foot' figure of 3085ft.. 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