How similar do you find Los Santos to it's real life equivalent LA

[Heists]

 

And in LC, particularly in Algonquin, it's really samey and a bit dull.

 

 

I really don't agree with that at all. I've walked end to end in Algonquin many times and it always feels like I'm transitioning through distinctive parts where the architecture and people change. Maybe you just don't have any love for NYC, but every borough looks and feels different.

 

Yeah I agree. Though the place is dull though.

 

Edit: on a side note I wonder what this years Need For Speed's rendition of LA will look like, from what we've seen so far it is certainly looking good.

Edited July 10, 2015 by Heists

[ZHPbim]

The biggest missing part is the San Fernando Valley.

 

......duh. Why havent I thought of that. That would've been amazing if they extended the map north to include NoHo, sherman oaks, and Van Nuys for some more gang activity in the valley. God that would've been awesome.

[Ewok626]

the most incredible thing is how many obscure stores, restaurants, and apartments in LS are exact counterparts of other obscure buildings in LA

 

you can tell that R* did indeed spend a year doing photography in LA as they've said

 

 

by FAR the best open world game in terms of raw graphics assets (not open world life... not freedom... gameplay, etc) just pure outer game world

Yeah they even have some graffiti that was in the LA river in the LS river but they changed the letters.

[polaris23]

Not sure about the vibe and the lack of places to enter definitely hinders the vibe, BUT, and it's a big but, they both look very similar. The amount of real-life buildings they've shoved into Los Santos from Southern California as a whole is astonishing. People really only make note of landmarks. Me, I don't care about those. It's random sh*t like this:

 

- There's a vegetarian restaurant in Vespucci named Lettucebe. That tiny little slot of a building has always intrigued me. One day I searched up vegan restaurants around the Venice area and in just five minutes I found Lettucebe's real-life counterpart. Sadly I forgot it's name but I had it bookmarked on my currently incapacitated laptop.

I completely agree.

 

And its not just the physical city itself that is a replica of LA, but other components as well, such as the radio stations. Hell, Flying Lotus has his own radio station in the game and he's a huge, LA grown musician who is hitting it big now.

 

They also got big names in the local Hispanic LA area for other stations, such as the Spanish station has Don Chete (huge amongst the Latino crowd).

[ABCDOGGY ginette]

Los Santos is small, it's what, 12 sq kilometers? When I can't take the bus to work I just walk and I live about 4.5 kilometers away from my job. 4.5 kilometers is longer than the diameter of Los Santos from the Northwest (Richman) to the Southeast (Port of Los Santos)

 

Let's do some quik math:

- My workplace and my home are in the same neighboorhood.

- 4.5 kilometers separates me from my job.

- My city has a population of about 100,000

 

Conclusion:

Los Santos is smaller than my neighborhood in a small city of 100,000 people. And it is supposed to be an accurate depiction of one of the most big, if not the biggest city in the USA?

[CarnageRacing00]

@MichiganMuscle77 So I am, once again getting hated on for posting my opinion?

 

No, you're getting hated on because your "opinion" is factually wrong (similar to saying "2+2=5, in my opinion") and you act like everyone is an asshole for disagreeing with you. We're not disagreeing with you to be dicks, we're disagreeing with you because you're WRONG. Los Santos is bigger than Liberty City, V's San Andreas is WAAYYYYYYYYY bigger than the original San Andreas. These are FACTS, not OPINIONS.

 

 

 

GTA IV used brown and grey to depress us and make us sympathize with the depressed characters:

IV used grey and brown because it was autumn/winter in the game, just like in V is spring/summer.

 

 

I wasn't criticizing IV over the color palette, but I do think it had more to do with the tone of the game. I think the setting of Autumn also had a lot to do with setting that tone.

 

 

 

And in LC, particularly in Algonquin, it's really samey and a bit dull.

 

 

I really don't agree with that at all. I've walked end to end in Algonquin many times and it always feels like I'm transitioning through distinctive parts where the architecture and people change. Maybe you just don't have any love for NYC, but every borough looks and feels different.

 

 

I don't think they felt THAT different, but yeah there were distinct areas.

Los Santos is small, it's what, 12 sq kilometers? When I can't take the bus to work I just walk and I live about 4.5 kilometers away from my job. 4.5 kilometers is longer than the diameter of Los Santos from the Northwest (Richman) to the Southeast (Port of Los Santos)

 

Let's do some quik math:

- My workplace and my home are in the same neighboorhood.

- 4.5 kilometers separates me from my job.

- My city has a population of about 100,000

 

Conclusion:

Los Santos is smaller than my neighborhood in a small city of 100,000 people. And it is supposed to be an accurate depiction of one of the most big, if not the biggest city in the USA?

 

It's also a video game

 

Seriously, you really expected it to be made to scale? Come on dude.

Edited July 10, 2015 by MichiganMuscle77

[PhillBellic]

 

The biggest missing part is the San Fernando Valley.

 

......duh. Why havent I thought of that. That would've been amazing if they extended the map north to include NoHo, sherman oaks, and Van Nuys for some more gang activity in the valley. God that would've been awesome.

 

Also, South East to include an expy Anaheim as well.

[CarnageRacing00]

More map would be cool, but ask yourself: Just how far do you want to drive just to get to any specific place? I mean, when a map is TOO big, it can become a chore to get where you want to go. There have been times in V where I've thought "god dammit why did I have to drive over HERE to start the mission, just to be told I have to drive all the way to the other side of the f*cking map to actually DO the mission?"

[PhillBellic]

More map would be cool, but ask yourself: Just how far do you want to drive just to get to any specific place? I mean, when a map is TOO big, it can become a chore to get where you want to go. There have been times in V where I've thought "god dammit why did I have to drive over HERE to start the mission, just to be told I have to drive all the way to the other side of the f*cking map to actually DO the mission?"

Well, personally I think it would be fun. I simply like Driving around in every GTA Game. The more Map the better, I say.

[CarnageRacing00]

 

More map would be cool, but ask yourself: Just how far do you want to drive just to get to any specific place? I mean, when a map is TOO big, it can become a chore to get where you want to go. There have been times in V where I've thought "god dammit why did I have to drive over HERE to start the mission, just to be told I have to drive all the way to the other side of the f*cking map to actually DO the mission?"

Well, personally I think it would be fun. I simply like Driving around in every GTA Game. The more Map the better, I say.

 

 

Sometimes I feel that way... other times not. I'm OK with V's map size in the end, it's big, not as big as some open world games, but I feel like it's big enough that I can enjoy just cruising.

[goblinthegnome]

Having lived in the LA area, my complaints are that Downtown Los Santos isn't big enough, nor "downtown" enough to being similar to Downtown LA for me, and that there should be more skyscrapers in the Century City region of LS (Backlot City). Overall, some of you might agree with me on this, but I wished they just layered the GTA V map with the Midnight Club: LA map because it would've been bigger, more diverse, and closer to being similar to Los Angeles. If you're wondering what makes Midnight Club: LA's map so special, it feels wider in city size and not so "crammed together" as the Los Santos area.

[Claptrap NL]

It's not simular at all.

Were are the Latino streetgangs, Bloods & Crips?

Were are all the models and celebs?

[DaWiesel]

It's not simular at all.

Were are the Latino streetgangs, Bloods & Crips?

Were are all the models and celebs?

In South Los Santos, East Los Santos, Vinewood, Rockford Hills, Richman and Vinewood Hills.

[CarnageRacing00]

It's not simular at all.

Were are the Latino streetgangs, Bloods & Crips?

Were are all the models and celebs?

 

Is that a serious question?

[Claptrap NL]

 

It's not simular at all.

Were are the Latino streetgangs, Bloods & Crips?

Were are all the models and celebs?

 

Is that a serious question?

 

Are you asking me?

[polaris23]

Its by far Rockstar's best city.

[Uncle Vlad]

Never been to LA irl, but there are countless pictures and videos of it and many movies are set in LA. So I´d say after IV´s LC R* did the next helluva job.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

And in LC, particularly in Algonquin, it's really samey and a bit dull.

The people who say this must really take no interest in getting out of their cars and taking a walk and looking around. I can't say this about any GTA game except for GTA III. No area feels samey and dull. Do some exploring.

[Non Biased GTA 4 fan]

if you never been to LA then your opinion is irrelevant just like mine I never been there

[slimeball supreme]

It's pretty accurate IMO, but it just feels a lot more vertical than real life LA looks.

Also, the whole idea of GTA basing its last two depictions on a mediocre Arnold Schwarzenegger movie seems REALLY f*cking stupid in my eyes, it just doesn't make sense on SO many levels.

But I'm a retarded goldfish, so I wouldn't know.

 

@MichiganMuscle

Citywise, LC is bigger than LS. Not the whole map, just the city. This is facts.

 

EDIT:

Its by far Rockstar's best city.

I gotta admit, that's a really funny joke. Edited July 11, 2015 by Mr. Fahrenheit

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

Honestly I was and still am kind of disappointed in the size of Los Santos. In my opinion, Mirror Park needed more depth and an upper middle class gated community or two. And Richman should've been a little more expansive. You know how Beverly Hills has those little roundabouts at certain intersections? MC:LA replicated them. They should've been in Richman. I also wish Richman had more of a gridlock layout. I know people get bored of flatness and straight roads and I can relate but I think Richman should've been gridlocked full of mansions. At least 6 or 8 blocks or something.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Scaglietti

[gamer_dog]

Wow very intellectual thoughts, personally LS is everything that's L.A crammed to together in just the right manner it seems a great place to get to know and makes a fantastic playground for online since its easy geography where as L.A noire takes more real approach and is so boring to travel across.. as for colour it's perfect in V and makes it way more attractive to play and explore with views that almost melt in your mouth with vibrance it suits this one but maybe it wouldn't work as well if it was driven by multiple character system.

[XenoxX]

It's pretty accurate IMO, but it just feels a lot more vertical than real life LA looks.

Also, the whole idea of GTA basing its last two depictions on a mediocre Arnold Schwarzenegger movie seems REALLY f*cking stupid in my eyes, it just doesn't make sense on SO many levels.

But I'm a retarded goldfish, so I wouldn't know.

 

@MichiganMuscle

Citywise, LC is bigger than LS. Not the whole map, just the city. This is facts.

 

EDIT:

Its by far Rockstar's best city.

I gotta admit, that's a really funny joke.

 

Why cant you accpet other peoples opinion.

I agree the City is one of the best R* ever made, if not the best.

 

Alson what do you mean by its "last two depictions" ?

[PhillBellic]

I would have liked more Suburban Sprawl. After all the Los Angeles Metropolitan Region is infamous for it.

[Jabalous]

Rockstar's clever world design makes you either like or not to like the world that they make. Here is a quote from Dan to 'How do you research LA?' in an interview:

 

It's a fascinating city – it's kind of obsessed with itself. It's a 20th century city too: cars and real estate are its driving forces. There's no other reason for it to be there. It's so unlike Britain, that's what's so interesting. New York has a relationship you can understand, LA is nothing to do with Britain. It's alien to me and Sam, who have come over from London, it's like living on the moon. And some of the guys from Scotland adore it, some of them can't stand it – it's very interesting to see their reactions.

 

 

Decepting the feel of a city to make it tastes differently from player to another is something that no other developer can manage to do except Rockstar. It is interesting to see how sunny-soaked LA was made into an HD LS that left players, like me, not able to stand its culture, while leaving many happy with it after coming from the cold and bleak HD LC.

 

Different tastes...

[CarnageRacing00]

It's pretty accurate IMO, but it just feels a lot more vertical than real life LA looks.

Also, the whole idea of GTA basing its last two depictions on a mediocre Arnold Schwarzenegger movie seems REALLY f*cking stupid in my eyes, it just doesn't make sense on SO many levels.

But I'm a retarded goldfish, so I wouldn't know.

 

@MichiganMuscle

Citywise, LC is bigger than LS. Not the whole map, just the city. This is facts.

 

EDIT:

Its by far Rockstar's best city.

I gotta admit, that's a really funny joke.

I didn't say they based the cities on the f*cking movie, I said they seem to have gone with a similar theme. If you can't draw the parallels there, I don't know what to tell you.

[slimeball supreme]

 

It's pretty accurate IMO, but it just feels a lot more vertical than real life LA looks.

Also, the whole idea of GTA basing its last two depictions on a mediocre Arnold Schwarzenegger movie seems REALLY f*cking stupid in my eyes, it just doesn't make sense on SO many levels.

But I'm a retarded goldfish, so I wouldn't know.

@MichiganMuscle

Citywise, LC is bigger than LS. Not the whole map, just the city. This is facts.

EDIT:

 

Its by far Rockstar's best city.

 

I gotta admit, that's a really funny joke.

 

Why cant you accpet other peoples opinion.

I agree the City is one of the best R* ever made, if not the best.

 

Alson what do you mean by its "last two depictions" ?

It's last two depictions of two of the most important cities in the United States. Y'know, the two cities featured in the majority of American media and are extremely influential in the crime genre. Of course that when R* does it, their depictions are based on a sh*tty Arnold Shwarzenegger movie (which was also one of his lowest grossing).

[CarnageRacing00]

 

 

It's pretty accurate IMO, but it just feels a lot more vertical than real life LA looks.

Also, the whole idea of GTA basing its last two depictions on a mediocre Arnold Schwarzenegger movie seems REALLY f*cking stupid in my eyes, it just doesn't make sense on SO many levels.

But I'm a retarded goldfish, so I wouldn't know.

@MichiganMuscle

Citywise, LC is bigger than LS. Not the whole map, just the city. This is facts.

EDIT:

 

Its by far Rockstar's best city.

 

I gotta admit, that's a really funny joke.

 

Why cant you accpet other peoples opinion.

I agree the City is one of the best R* ever made, if not the best.

 

Alson what do you mean by its "last two depictions" ?

It's last two depictions of two of the most important cities in the United States. Y'know, the two cities featured in the majority of American media and are extremely influential in the crime genre. Of course that when R* does it, their depictions are based on a sh*tty Arnold Shwarzenegger movie (which was also one of his lowest grossing).

READ BETTER. See the post above yours genius.

[slimeball supreme]

 

 

 

It's pretty accurate IMO, but it just feels a lot more vertical than real life LA looks.

Also, the whole idea of GTA basing its last two depictions on a mediocre Arnold Schwarzenegger movie seems REALLY f*cking stupid in my eyes, it just doesn't make sense on SO many levels.

But I'm a retarded goldfish, so I wouldn't know.

@MichiganMuscle

Citywise, LC is bigger than LS. Not the whole map, just the city. This is facts.

EDIT:

Its by far Rockstar's best city.

I gotta admit, that's a really funny joke.

Why cant you accpet other peoples opinion.

I agree the City is one of the best R* ever made, if not the best.

 

Alson what do you mean by its "last two depictions" ?

It's last two depictions of two of the most important cities in the United States. Y'know, the two cities featured in the majority of American media and are extremely influential in the crime genre. Of course that when R* does it, their depictions are based on a sh*tty Arnold Shwarzenegger movie (which was also one of his lowest grossing).

READ BETTER. See the post above yours genius.

Completely missed that one. lol

But anyway, REALLY? It 'seems'? You've been very vocal in the part where you say that it ACTUALLY IS.

Yeah sure, you're right in a few aspects, but only in a few areas.

Look at it this way, LS is in many aspects just as gritty as LC. Are you even looking hard enough?

Trash is thrown around everywhere, graffiti is splattered across most of South LS, the homeless are all over Stab City and East/South LS!

It would be pretty ignorant to say that LS is a clean happy wonderland of fun. If anything you could simply interpret as LC being based more on TV crime dramas like 24 being where they built most of the city's grit and depression (NY is one of the safest cities in the U.S. atm) while LS is based more so on typical action movie depictions of LA.

[XCalinX]

You simply can't say that LS is bigger than LC. Look at the road density in LC, much more than in LS