Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

GTAForums does NOT endorse or allow any kind of GTA Online modding, mod menus or tools. Do NOT post them here or advertise them, as per the forum rules.
Rocket man FI

Why San Fierro and Las Venturas didn't appear in Gta V?

Recommended Posts

Lioshenka

Roughly 4x if you include all underwater, but the bland design of over half of it makes it forgettable.

Hear, hear.

 

I was thinking how to best describe it, but I think you nailed it. GTA 5 map is just forgettable. SA had things like little cabins in the woods, wheelchair on the jetty etc, 5 doesn't have it. Besdes, I am not very keen on the whole hilly and mountaney landscape ofthe countryside, I was expecting to see some redwoods, and am quite dissapointed we didn't get much apart from a small patch by the new Chiliad.

 

I don't even remember town names in 5 :(

 

It's a good game, but I would still rate SA higher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Deadite

@ Tiger

 

I'm sorry but I just think your theory about Rockstar being concerned about similarities to SA's map is nonsense. It makes no sense whatsoever. With the advances in today gaming technology, 3 cities can be easily designed on V's map in a manner that don't make it similar to SA's map. If they made LS in V look much different and more detailed than LS in SA, why can't they do the same for SF or LV ?

 

Your theory is nonsense and that's just my opinion of it. Nothing personal.

It's funny how you always are such an ass when talking about issues you don't completly understand.

Game maps have more detail and take way more time to develop than they did back in 2004. R* can't spend 10 years in creating 3 cities for the price of one game.

There's time, hardware, resources, story, limitations.

Imagine for a minute the job it takes to create peds, securing songs rights for the radios, mapping each city with the level of detail seen on HD LC/LS, writing a cohesive story that takes advantage of three massive cities (nevermind they barely used LS in V)

 

SF, LA and Las Vegas are not that close to each other on real life, so putting those cities back together for the sake of gameplay would stink like SA pandering as much as Franklin did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General

 

@ Tiger

 

I'm sorry but I just think your theory about Rockstar being concerned about similarities to SA's map is nonsense. It makes no sense whatsoever. With the advances in today gaming technology, 3 cities can be easily designed on V's map in a manner that don't make it similar to SA's map. If they made LS in V look much different and more detailed than LS in SA, why can't they do the same for SF or LV ?

 

Your theory is nonsense and that's just my opinion of it. Nothing personal.

It's funny how you always are such an ass when talking about issues you don't completly understand.

Game maps have more detail and take way more time to develop than they did back in 2004. R* can't spend 10 years in creating 3 cities for the price of one game.

There's time, hardware, resources, story, limitations.

Imagine for a minute the job it takes to create peds, securing songs rights for the radios, mapping each city with the level of detail seen on HD LC/LS, writing a cohesive story that takes advantage of three massive cities (nevermind they barely used LS in V)

 

SF, LA and Las Vegas are not that close to each other on real life, so putting those cities back together for the sake of gameplay would stink like SA pandering as much as Franklin did.

 

 

Ok we don't understand that it, but you do ? Do you work for Rockstar ? Do you develop games on the scale of GTA yourself ? I'm gonna safely say that you don't. And either way, none of that is my concern either. I do know from seeing other games that it is possible. How Rockstar would do it, granted I don't know and I don't care to go into either, all I am sure of, is that it can be done. They have even confirmed that themselves, when he was at Rockstar, The Benz said that Rockstar were capable of it do it, and I that's something they would consider in the near future - I guess you don't pay much attention to gaming news. So your argument goes straight into the trash can.

 

Of course SF, LA and LV not close to each other in real life. There is no such city called Los Santos or Liberty City in real life. LA is not as small as LS in real life. You get my point - IT'S A GAME, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REAL LIFE. So what the hell is your point bro ? LOL gosh I'm struggling to make any sense whatsoever out of this part of your post :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Deadite

Ok we don't understand that it, but you do ? Do you work for Rockstar ? Do you develop games on the scale of GTA yourself ? I'm gonna safely say that you don't.

No i don't, but at least i have some common sense, that way i care to grasp the logistics and work behind a game.

 

...I do know from seeing other games that it is possible...

Really? Show me another game on the current gaming generation with 3 entirely different renditions of cities recreated on a faithful manner, go ahead.

I'll wait here.

 

...all I am sure of, is that it can be done. They have even confirmed that themselves, when he was at Rockstar, The Benz said that Rockstar were capable of it do it, and I that's something they would consider in the near future - I guess you don't pay much attention to gaming news. So your argument goes straight into the trash can...

No it doesn't:

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2012/12/14/rockstar-wants-to-put-all-grand-theft-auto-cities-in-one-game

 

" Of course at some point we would like to have one big world containing all our cities and let the player fly between them and revisit their favorite areas,"

Read the word "revisit", as in reusing maps from past games , not creating 3 entirely different urban enviroments at the same time. That saves A LOOOT of work.

 

Of course SF, LA and LV not close to each other in real life. There is no such city called Los Santos or Liberty City in real life. LA is not as small as LS in real life. You get my point - IT'S A GAME, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REAL LIFE. So what the hell is your point bro ?

You missed my point so hard. I just said that putting SA cities in another gta is gonna draw comparisons to SA.

The examples you made are also stupid.

LOL gosh I'm struggling to make any sense whatsoever

Story of your life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LykosSan
On 4/30/2017 at 7:03 PM, Official General said:

 

Ok we don't understand that it, but you do ? Do you work for Rockstar ? Do you develop games on the scale of GTA yourself ? I'm gonna safely say that you don't. And either way, none of that is my concern either. I do know from seeing other games that it is possible. How Rockstar would do it, granted I don't know and I don't care to go into either, all I am sure of, is that it can be done. They have even confirmed that themselves, when he was at Rockstar, The Benz said that Rockstar were capable of it do it, and I that's something they would consider in the near future - I guess you don't pay much attention to gaming news. So your argument goes straight into the trash can.

 

Of course SF, LA and LV not close to each other in real life. There is no such city called Los Santos or Liberty City in real life. LA is not as small as LS in real life. You get my point - IT'S A GAME, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE REAL LIFE. So what the hell is your point bro ? LOL gosh I'm struggling to make any sense whatsoever out of this part of your post :lol:

GTA V is a masterpiece that anyone you ask will know of and insist the same. It's a shame that the proclaimed hardcore fans can't appreciate the effort they put in. It almost justifies the way R is acting now with GTA online.Their work is simply called dull and bland by the people who are f*cking blinded by nostalgia. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
billiejoearmstrong8
2 hours ago, LykosSan said:

GTA V is a masterpiece that anyone you ask will know of and insist the same. It's a shame that the proclaimed hardcore fans can't appreciate the effort they put in. It almost justifies the way R is acting now with GTA online.Their work is simply called dull and bland by the people who are f*cking blinded by nostalgia. 

Over half the map is barren empty hills and waste of space underwater landscape. I don't know what term other than "dull and bland" better describes mountains the size of cities that have literally nothing of interest on them taking up a huge percentage of the map, round the edge no less so they're not even used to create distance between different areas. There's a giant lake that you can go underwater in that is literally completely empty. That giant ring road leading from Los Santos to...Los Santos that encases the entire thing is some questionable design too. They made a huge map that fails to feel huge. V has many great things about it and even the map has great things about it but some criticism of the map is justified.

Edited by billiejoearmstrong8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Suuiii8887

I definitely agree that it is unfortunate, but it's probably has something to do with GTA 5 being an Xbox 360 and PS3 game later ported over to Next Gen and PC. It also was because Rockstar wanted to capture the vibe of L.A. I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HOW'S ANNIE?

If I were to want to trade anything it'd be thr underwater component for another city, maybe San Diego.

 

I liked Rockstars focus on soley Southern California. San Andreas felt huge due to the draw-distance, which isn't something they could easily mask in a 2013 game and still have looking good. As it is the transition from forest to desert in V feels a bit jarring, with no room to breathe. Imagine trying to encompass an such a huge geographical distance on a map at a similar scale to what we received.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gta7dev

Are you guys kidding me? Isn't it obvious?

 

PS3/Xbox 360 limitations. It maxed out the disc size + performance and loading times would be 10 times worse and it was atrocious.

 

All limitations you can think of that this game has even TODAY you can blame the old generation consoles for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kiwi047

Probably because they werent necessary, or didnt fit in with the devs vision. its not GTA: SA after all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Official General
6 hours ago, kiwi047 said:

Probably because they werent necessary, or didnt fit in with the devs vision. its not GTA: SA after all

Then going by your logic, what was the point of making GTA IV ? IV is set in Liberty City just like GTA III. I guess it was not necessary to make IV, because it is not III after all.

 

See how silly your reasoning sounds ?

Edited by Official General

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 2 Users Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 2 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.