[Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian]

Rockstar Games is hiding something. The overall mapsize is bigger than GTA San Andreas, GTA IV and Red Dead Redemption combined and Los Santos itself without surroundings is as big as GTA IV Liberty City. They hide a big part of the city itself.

[Blackous666]

only small thing here is that thing in your pants not the city

[redsandseast]

QUOTE (Choco Taco @ Friday, Nov 16 2012, 18:11)

I figure that the city area in this picture ( http://i.imgur.com/lFnIL.jpg ), including the parts that got cut off to the northwest and northeast, is about this size:

Very good analysis, but please, have look at this video that shows los santos with IV's draw distance youtube (@2:29) and then compare to this picture http://i.imgur.com/lFnIL.jpg
The visible Area in the V screen is about 2x of SA's Los Santos

[Toke]

@OP-You sir are a retard. Yes lets compare high res screenshots with pictures of a five year old game WITH YOUR PHONE. You REALLY couldn't go through the five minutes of research to actually find some nice looking IV screenshots? Your sir are a lazy tw*t.

[redsandseast]

http://i46.tinypic.com/3502sz5.jpg
and this picture shows how much city is on the left of the observatory screenshot

This post has been edited by redsandseast on Friday, Nov 16 2012, 22:47

[mkey82]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Friday, Nov 16 2012, 20:30)

The overall mapsize is bigger than GTA San Andreas, GTA IV and Red Dead Redemption combined and Los Santos itself without surroundings is as big as GTA IV Liberty City.

I've been following R* for a while, not everything they say is true. At times, they are outright lying.

[Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian]

QUOTE (mkey82 @ Friday, Nov 16 2012, 19:58)

I've been following R* for a while, not everything they say is true. At times, they are outright lying.

Well, I think it's a problem that each magazine claim different things. Game Informer claimed that GTA V's map is as big as GTA IV, GTA SA and RDR combined including interiors and room to spare. Another magazine (don't know right now which one) claimed that GTA V will be as big as 5 times Red Dead Redemption. GTA SA's map is about 13.9 square miles big, GTA IV's map is about 6.25 square miles big and RDR's map (ONLY exploreable area) is about 6-7 square miles big. So according to Game Informer the map of GTA V would be about 26-28 square miles big. According to the other magazine GTA V would be about 30-35 square miles big (more like 35 square miles). Either way the map will be massive but there is a noticeable difference between 26-28 and 30-35 square miles. I think nobody should take everything that Rockstar Games says word-for-word. I even think nobody should take everything that any company says word-for-word. What was the most signficant thing where you think that Rockstar lied? If I remember right then they claimed that GTA IV supports SLI/CrossFire but in real it even decreases the performance.

This post has been edited by Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian on Saturday, Nov 17 2012, 18:02

[swe1]

Your expectations are to high. This is getting insane. The city will be big, and the countryside about 7times as big as the city. if you look at the pic when he drives of the plane you can see the silhouette of downtown up in the corner. Remember that it continues on the sides and in front to!

[Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian]

QUOTE (swe1 @ Saturday, Nov 17 2012, 19:13)

Your expectations are to high. This is getting insane. The city will be big, and the countryside about 7times as big as the city. if you look at the pic when he drives of the plane you can see the silhouette of downtown up in the corner. Remember that it continues on the sides and in front to!

I don't think that the surroundings will be 7 times bigger than the city itself. Like I said before the city itself is about as big as Liberty City from GTA IV and the surroundings will be about 3-4 times bigger than the city if the information from the magazines is correct.

[Magic_Al]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Saturday, Nov 17 2012, 11:59)

QUOTE (mkey82 @ Friday, Nov 16 2012, 19:58) I've been following R* for a while, not everything they say is true. At times, they are outright lying. Well, I think it's a problem that each magazine claim different things. Game Informer claimed that GTA V's map is as big as GTA IV, GTA SA and RDR combined including interiors and room to spare. Another magazine (don't know right now which one) claimed that GTA V will be as big as 5 times Red Dead Redemption. GTA SA's map is about 13.9 square miles big, GTA IV's map is about 6.25 square miles big and RDR's map (ONLY exploreable area) is about 6-7 square miles big. So according to Game Informer the map of GTA V would be about 26-28 square miles big. According to the other magazine GTA V would be about 30-35 square miles big (more like 35 square miles). Either way the map will be massive but there is a noticeable difference between 26-28 and 30-35 square miles. I think nobody should take everything that Rockstar Games says word-for-word. I even think nobody should take everything that any company says word-for-word. What was the most signficant thing where you think that Rockstar lied? If I remember right then they claimed that GTA IV supports SLI/CrossFire but in real it even decreases the performance.

There isn't really a contradiction in those descriptions. The difference represents the uncertainly of how much water/underwater and interior space is figured in. An apples-to-apples comparison between the GTAs and RDR would use only land area, in which case:

• GTASA 11.4 sq mi (1/3 urban and 2/3 rural)
• GTAIV 3.4 sq mi (urban)
• RDR 5.9 sq mi (rural, in boundaries)

Total of three land areas = 20.7 sq mi
5x GTAIV land area = 17 sq mi

So again, the 5x method gives 80% of the sum-of-three method. It comes down to uncertainty of how much water area is considered. GTA SA is 20% water but that's all interior to land, and you can go underwater, so it tends to get counted in the 13.9 square miles. GTAIV's shape is harder to describe it's kind of arbitrary how much water to count in the map — to say everything in a rectangle counts is kind of arbitrary because the corners are very far from land and pointless to visit. RDR has a bit of water too.

Here's some reason to say the upper size of GTA V may be less than double the size of San Andreas: saying 5x GTAIV's land area gives less than double the land area of GTASA, so saying GTAV is twice as big as GTASA may not be accurate, and notably Rockstar or their interviewers have not said that. The sum of GTAIV and RDR's usable land area is less than GTASA's, and less still if GTASA's underwater area is added back in. This suggests that you can't get to double GTASA size by adding the area of GTASA, GTAIV, and RDR.

If that analysis is true, then the upper limit for GTAV's size would be less than 28 square miles, arbitrarily assuming a GTASA ratio of 80% land, 20% water. Obviously if it's 50-50 land/water like GTAIV, then the same content could stretch beyond 44 square miles, presumably with deep water area you can't reach the bottom of.

This post has been edited by Magic_Al on Saturday, Nov 17 2012, 20:32

[mkey82]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Saturday, Nov 17 2012, 19:59)

Well, I think it's a problem that each magazine claim different things.

Speculation is just that, speculation. I'm yet to find any reputable and trust worthy gaming magazines.

I personally expect LS to be smaller then LC or, better said, LC without Alderney. At least as far as urban LS area goes. That would be quite satisfactory, size wise.

It makes almost no sense to me you'd have one town of approximate SA LS size (probably up to 25% larger) and a total map area of 5 SA maps. Water or no water, that's quite a lot of additional space. How many smaller towns would one need to give the entire land mass some cohesion? Obviously, if you have planes it would make sense to have some room for flying, however planes should really be kept as a nice side dish, not a necessity.

Even if you had one SA LS sized town on the SA sized map, you'd need some really crafty content in that area to make it interesting. I liked the open spaces in SA, they added a lot to the variety, however I found them interesting mostly for being nice transitions between urban areas.
Obviously this is just tastes talking.

As for proven R* lies, you can grab a copy of the GTAIV for PC and observe some of the inscriptions on the backside. Things like "enhanced for 64bit" while the game lacks a 64bit exe or the system requirements for a 256MB GF 7900 or X1900 cards. Pure bullsh*t. Right on the box.
I personally deem statements about the "living, breathing city" as lies as well, but that's a bit more subjective matter.

[GúnZinEss]

wow, some people sure have a lot of time on their hands lol

and CJ, those pics are much less accurate than the ones from the OP... way to show off the graphics

I think the ones posted by OP are fine and serves their purpose, only thing i say is that hes only showing algoquin-alderney distances, would be sweet if someone takes one from broker and see how much we can see from alderney for example. that way we can see the whole thing.

(example: a pic of when u jump out the plane in the final mission in tbogt)

[USAPatriot]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Friday, Nov 16 2012, 18:30)

Rockstar Games is hiding something. The overall mapsize is bigger than GTA San Andreas, GTA IV and Red Dead Redemption combined and Los Santos itself without surroundings is as big as GTA IV Liberty City. They hide a big part of the city itself.

I can not agree more. I don't want to be super let down if they are not hiding more, but it just really seems like they are. They keep showing the same areas over and over, from different angles. It makes me wonder who are they kidding? (I'm sure they are tricking a lot sadly).

[Choco Taco]

East to west estimate - http://i.imgur.com/BxK9T.jpg

That matches this method - http://i.imgur.com/9VZAb.jpg

[bakerach]

QUOTE

Choco Taco Posted on Tuesday, Dec 4 2012, 04:23   East to west estimate - http://i.imgur.com/BxK9T.jpg That matches this method - http://i.imgur.com/9VZAb.jpg

That isn't really an accurate way to measure their proportions relative to each other. The problem is that the GTA IV camera used a trick to make things look bigger and farther away, which the GTA V screenshots haven't been doing. That is, IV used a very, very wide viewing angle that had a barrel-type effect making things look farther away than they were. Think of this first picture as GTA IV, and the second as GTA IV

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images/40mm.jpg

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images/r-90mm.jpg

[tenpennyisplainevil]

What I think is that the magazines haven't been told how big it is. That's why one of them said "from what we could see from the helicopter..." when telling us how big the map is. In fact, we should ignore what they say about the size, since they apparently only have seen a demo which includes a helicopter ride with view over LS. It's ridiculous to say that the map is 5x RDR or RDR+IV+SA, only having seen a damn helicopter tour which probably didn't even remotely cover the whole map.

[Choco Taco]

QUOTE (bakerach @ Tuesday, Dec 4 2012, 01:28)

QUOTE Choco Taco Posted on Tuesday, Dec 4 2012, 04:23    East to west estimate - http://i.imgur.com/BxK9T.jpg That matches this method - http://i.imgur.com/9VZAb.jpg That isn't really an accurate way to measure their proportions relative to each other. The problem is that the GTA IV camera used a trick to make things look bigger and farther away, which the GTA V screenshots haven't been doing. That is, IV used a very, very wide viewing angle that had a barrel-type effect making things look farther away than they were. Think of this first picture as GTA IV, and the second as GTA IV http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images/40mm.jpg http://www.luminous-landscape.com/images/r-90mm.jpg

That mainly causes problems for objects in the foreground and background. If two objects in the background are similar in height like the Chrysler Building and the Bank Tower, you can match the sizes and distances will match up.

http://i.imgur.com/pzjMb.jpg

[Choco Taco]

To test the method, I compared pictures from different areas in IV. The results were close - http://i.imgur.com/R3kcR.jpg


Los Santos city estimate - http://i.imgur.com/qaGBP.jpg


They haven't shown enough of the southern area to get a good estimate, but I don't think it's very far - http://i.imgur.com/BynLs.jpg