Leaderboard

Why argue on how big the map is? Really? It's gonna be big and "alive" and that's all that matters. You guys are like my ex girlfriend... "I thought it was gonna be huuuge". =))

If I win I think i'll give the giftcard to Massacre so I can see this contraption.

I chopped together this wallpaper for my PC, thought i'd share it here too. Attachment looks crap lol"!

Quit yapping at each other and get back on topic.

^ proud american. Also, something about maps, etc., etc.

This is Andy, he's a two year old beagle rescue from Tennessee and most importantly our newest edition to the family!

I slightly remade the map. Rockstar said they were trying to capture the 'sprawling' aspect of Los Angeles, trying to do one city - and doing it properly. So I colored over the rest of the city that you missed out. Also I would like to see where the creator of the map saw Slab City - I'm pretty sure it wasn't in the trailer or the GI article. However, Palm Springs was in the trailer. So now calculate the new percentage of the size of the city part of the map in ratio with the rest of it, and tell me what you come up with. It may not be 100% accurate, but neither is yours.

Character switch in GTA IV

So, I was scrolling through my facebook newsfeed, and I bumped into this. I liked a facebook page called "Ryder", and the guy posted this. "This is a thumbnail from the ONLY real leaked GTA V gameplay. Its from the first mission. Within minutes of the video being uploaded, rockstar removed and closed the page. All thats left is this thumbnail. Enjoy." Oh sorry, immediately after this picture, he posted this, but he made this himself I think "Rockstar also announced that GTA V's map will be larger than San Andreas, Red Dead, and GTA IV COMBINEDDDDDDD. This should give you a huge idea on the map size." This is the guys page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ryder/415705438498629

...

I'd like to have extended mags, flashlights, laser aiming devices (increase accuracy), different grips and different finishes (such as nickel, gold, realwood, etc, something as well as gold anyway, gold guns look fucking stupid IMO)

I would prefer 'gameplay' without the HUD and all that type of stuff. Something action packed, not explaining the mechanics and all that shit. Just like the first trailer, and the IV trailers.

What a waste of a first post, it almost made me break down in tears. But to answer your question: No. That guy is Michael, one of the three protagonists to be in GTA V. he was talking about the guy getting out the back on the right. the guy with the buzzcut Q. Do you start with a place, or with the qualities and themes you want to address? A (Dan Houser). The longest part of the process of making one of these games is making the world. If this wasn’t the right way to do it, which I think it probably is, anyway, just from a pure production standpoint you have to start building the world as soon as possible. We start with the place, and then the characters come out from the place. Yeah i read this part in the mag. But main characters don't just come from the world. That's not how it works. When you start building a city, that's called production. There has to be a loose plot and typical characters to build on, which is part of the pre-production process. Mission characters and other tidbits were probably what Dan was talking about. It would be far to expensive *(time wise, as well as resources) to just randomly chuck a story together after making the city. They probably did start out with only one of those three as the main characters, but at some point in pre-production decided to make that their core idea, and build upon it. They could have changed parts of the city to cater the story, and altered the story to fit the game. It's all an evolutional process. Trevor may well have looked different to begin with, but i don't think he would have changed at all from the trailer we got last year, that's way too late into production to make those sort of changes The only reason i stated this to begin with is because i have just finished a three year games course, of which we were taken through the entire process of game design. The three cores of this process are pre-production, production and post-production, just like film.

What a waste of a first post, it almost made me break down in tears. But to answer your question: No. That guy is Michael, one of the three protagonists to be in GTA V.

So, we'd like Gran Turismo in the game?

I'm going to assume "Lamar" is black. Not only because Franklin is black, but Lamar is the blackest fucking name in the world, along with 'Malik' and 'Tyrone', greatly contrasting the name 'Franklin' which I thought became extinct in 1789. That guy is too white to be black.

Nawh, I'm here for the robot sex.

Trevor could actually be driving, so we can't see him, but who knows. This could just be a specific Michael and Franklin duo mission. They did say there was going to be a LOT more heists, with planning and preparation being more important so I expect a lot of these robbery missions. He could be driving. I can 100% say he would have been designed way before the city was even built. You never start production without a well thought out pre-production, i.e characters, They're very important from the get go. Anyone even though that the bald guy is Franklin's 'crazy' friend Lamar?

That would back up the theory that they came up with Trevor after the first trailer and thats why he wasn't in it. Franklin is definatly the driver. The guy getting out the right rear door is probably an early design for Trevor.

So considerably we are getting more information because all three of the other magazines will have different questions in each interview, even if the first few panels are all the same. I hope these french guys ask about car customization.

A lot of international sites seem to be having exclusive information releasing on the 12th. Wonder if it will all be the same information, just translated into a lot of different languages.

I don't know what these puzzles will consist of, and I'll probably find that I am too lazy to do them, but I'm in. And just so you know, if I win, I'm not spending the gift card on GTA V. ... I'm spending it on a dildo, and the supplies I would need to make it into some kind of tiny flying machine.

I hope not. I better see the cars Day 1 or I'm trading it.

shit I totally forgot about this screenshot until going through the landmark page: THAT one shows the cars.

I think Treefitty was referring to this area, being the location of the airport.

So anyway, the airport is finally shown and it's south of the seaport (and the entire city portion). That's the Theme Building on the far left under the bridge. So instead of Palos Verdes Hills we have the airport sticking out into the ocean.

And that's the problem with creating the map. not just that "memorable parts of the city" is a really personal term thus leading to uncountable "versions" of LA... just go around and ask. ok, most ppl would say the beach, a hand full of downtown skyscrapers probably not even known by name, the glitter glamor of Hollywood + it's sign and don't forget 90210 cuz there was a TV show someone has heard of, and that it's fraking big. maybe include LAX as this is how most of the visitors come to LA and it has a benefit: due to the size and the Theme Building it's easily recognizable. but from here on, everyone has an own picture of what is LA, what's fun and memorable and what is not. bad enough as this is already, these opinions can change aswell. just take this, the first time I was in LA was a weekend trip with a couple collegues. I insisted to get up to the observatory, they didn't even knew about it thus calling my nuts cuz "that's boring"... I won, we went up there, they thanked me for helping them getting one of the most impressive looks over LA. I didn't know about the Watts Towers until San Andreas, now they are just as much a part of the LA area to me as the Hollywood sign is. San Andreas' Los Santos already covered more things than most people know about LA and on the other hand is still lacking so much more that makes for LA. What it lacked most in my eyes was the insane (sub)urban sprawl. I know that the technical and design reasons behind the game forced this, but yeah, no matter how hard you try, you can't create an LA lookalike without paying tribute to it's size. This, in turn, means repetitive, boring bits. because these repetitive, boring bits are just so much a part of LA's character as Hollywood, Sta Monica or South Central. I must say tho that comparing this to LA Noire doesn't feel right imho. Not just that LA Noire focuses on the actual city of LA whereas Los Santos always was an image of the entire LA basin, but also the fact that the main reason behind LA Noire was to create an almost accurate scale replica of the 40s LA, something that makes it fun to play... IF you're interested in exploring a long gone city. of course this is boring as it lacks action and takes long times to get from a to b, but one must admit that fastpaced action was never the concept. On the other hand, being scale accurate can go quite wrong. Just think of True Crime LA. one hour from the west to the east limit, pedal to the metal, through light traffic all along the same set of repetitive houses with the only landmark suggesting it's LA being the Library Tower. that might give you an accurate feel for the size and repetitiveness, but the cancer-giving lack of detail tells you that too big is easily possible... So, long story short, it's a hard thing creating a believable image of LA, not just when it comes to which landmarks are in or out (just think of the lack of landmarks in SA's LA - probably one of the most prominent would be the Dodger's Stadium) but it also to decide how much of LA's characteristic sprawl fits in to make it believable, without being too big to cater for an action game like GTA. now with the new pictures and the interviews with Dan and Aaron - I said it already - I'm more convinced that R* does a good job in capturing the size of LA. this also allows to put in more landmarks and if they get the geography and relative positions about right (at least better than in SA which was quite freestyle here) I'll be more than happy. as for the whole map size - including interiors - that's something I got stuck at aswell. I mean, no matter how awesome the part sounds where it says that the map will be bigger than RDR, SA and IV combined, depending on how much interior we get, we can lose a hell of a lot of landmass. for example the Library Tower has 1.3 million sqft of office space while it only sits on a fraction of that area. if R* only makes the roof accessible, we don't lose any area, with all floors accessible we lose an area about big enough to place SA's Mt Chiliad on (given the tower is created scale accurate) at a certain point I thought how awesome it would be to access every room in every building in this game I now feel like I don't need more accessibility than we had in San Andreas, percentage wise. I'd rather go with a couple more blocks of single family homes sprawling about and another square mile of open land. because if LS was the size of the map of IV, with every building fully accessible, this would suck up pretty much everything left in the size estimation given in the interview. I know, the pictures don't look like this is going to happen, but I think we should always keep that in mind when estimating the map dimensions because I doubt Aaron would have mentioned the interiors in such an explicit way if there wasn't anything special, like a huge increase in accessible buildings compared to previous titles.

Awesome dog.

In the interview they said that melee combat has been improved, but it will never be as focused on as gunfights, which is understandable.

Probably because he's not a 40 year old white guy. 'too black' definitely. I say we should be able to bleach his skin!

What's your point? I think his point is that there is a 0.001% chance that the city will be smaller than' Alderny and Algonquin combined' when the whole map is that fucking big. That is like what... 4mi^2? So you're saying the city accounts for 13% of the whole map (or probably less, since there is 'room to spare'). There is no fucking way that is going to happen. You know why? Because as 'Zee Kay' said: R* said that they are only making one large city, and they are making it as big as they can, as close to scale as they can, of course it wont be exact, it will be scaled down.

I ran out of popcorn. so... anything new about the map? treefitty? anyone?

Is your Father Ned Luke? Did your father move for the weather?

I, a white Englishman, walked through various areas in South Central when I went, and it didn't look like Boyz-n-da-Hood. It looked less intimidating than London to be honest. So I beg to differ on the first point. The fact that they have modernised pretty much concludes my arguement. They have changed, as has the culture. O.K. so you walked through what you thought was a gang neigbourhood when you were on holiday in the US. Wow sir, you must be an expert on the gangs in LA then. And how exactly are you an expert on LA gang culture when you're living in sydney austrailia? TV? Unless that's just a fake location. I've been to LA. Sure there are gangs. Nearly every city in the US that has a section of low socioeconomic standing has gangs. But very rarely do you walk into a neighborhood and see multiple large groups of people strapped and reppin colors. Shit's way more low key these days unless there is a dispute, in which case things can get pretty crazy. Hence why GTA 5 isn't focusing on gang culture (plus it's been done before and is played out). There probably will be gangs within the game that you can interact with in some way, like the gang members that would shoot at you in 4 when you started shooting near them, but they won't be the focus of the game. And I for one am happy about that. And btw, it became obvious that you were talking out your ass when you said hood gangs are pushing LSD. Are you kidding me? I don't know a single ghetto drug dealer that pushes psychadelics (besides ecstasy, but that's usually cut with mad stimulants). LSD is family territory. They have a chemist who has it perfected, it's distrubuted throughout the family (grateful dead family, rainbow family, ect.), and it moves down the chain. Plus even if they got their hands on it, pushing LSD would be a waste of time. There isn't a huge reward for the risk, and it isn't the kind of drug that people use daily so it won't have a steady flow of customers. And feel free for deleteing this post for being off topic. I appologize. The gang talk just needs to end. Gangs have already been done. Gta 5 sounds genious at this point so I don't know why people are getting upset.

so each character will have his own money? own set of weapons, etc.

TREVOR FLYS PLANES FRANKLIN ROBS CARS AND MICHEAL IS THE STEALTH AND TECH EXPERT IM GETTING A COPY OF GTAV OMGOMGOMG

lol wow I got that much, but are those specifics that only that character can do? GI said that each person had a few tricks up their sleeves that only they could do. I'll take my coppy in a PS3 version sent to PHX AZ, thanks

Hope there is a Los Santos chapter of The Lost.

And where the fuck have you been?

The hobo that got rich with the diamonds, moved to the hills in Vinewood and now directs porn ...... random guess.

I insist on the hologram cover staff. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9QR3qaK_Cs Its a great idea.

A 1974 Jensen Interceptor MKIII

The DLC has already been confirmed, there will be three separate episodes: one that takes you back to Los Santos in 1947, where you play as a detective called "Cool Felps" and have to solve various crimes around the city. One will be set in 1911 and will involve horses in some way, it will be wild west themed and you will play as "Jim Marsden". The last will be set in Brazil and will be entirely in slow motion and the protag is called "Mack Spane".