GTA V Mapped!

[Gregers07 43]

Even if Los Santos isn't as big as we hoped you have to remember it's not just L.A that R* are recreating, it's Southern California meaning we will probably see more than one city.

It's a very crude map but here is an example of how SoCal could be represented in V

[motoman 1]

nice map

[Cameron 15]

Even if Los Santos isn't as big as we hoped you have to remember it's not just L.A that R* are recreating, it's Southern California meaning we will probably see more than one city.

It's a very crude map but here is an example of how SoCal could be represented in V

sure to god hope not

[DuPz0r 5361]

Even if Los Santos isn't as big as we hoped you have to remember it's not just L.A that R* are recreating, it's Southern California meaning we will probably see more than one city.

It's a very crude map but here is an example of how SoCal could be represented in V

sure to god hope not

Nice idea. But i doubt it'll be all separated into islands somehow. I imagine a huge mainland (from what we've seen so far - See TreeFitty's map breakdown), with a mountain range around and some desert surrounding with a town or two. And maybe a single island, possibly representing Santa Catalina Island of the coast of L.A.

And that's me being wishfull, as we've only seen a couple of shots of the countryside outside of the city of LS...

[JoseAztecaz 3]

map needs to be like this but only bigger

[TheProdigy 0]

The map is set to just souther Cali. and they did shrink it a little. But the map is supposed to be about 4x larger than liberty City. Im not sure how big liberty city was to SA but the map is supposed to be very huge

[TreeFitty 2631]

But the map is supposed to be about 4x larger than liberty City.

That was a rumor.

[Drew-Barnes 64]

I'm not too bothered about the actual size of the map, as long as their is no wasted space. San Andreas may have been a bigger map, but there were a lot of areas that seemed to be there for the sake of it. GTA IV had a more compact feel to it because they used every inch of the map for something relevant.

[gmt 60]

I'm not too bothered about the actual size of the map, as long as their is no wasted space. San Andreas may have been a bigger map, but there were a lot of areas that seemed to be there for the sake of it. GTA IV had a more compact feel to it because they used every inch of the map for something relevant.

depends on how you define relevant.

if you look at it from a gameplay perspective, you could also settle down and call most parts liberty city wasted space. you could condense the locations of the gameplay to an island about the size of brooker, with a little space in between to give the illusion of actually moving between them.

to deliver a certain feeling to the player, both gta 4 and san andreas did their job very well. liberty really gives you the feeling of an nyc-ish metropolis with vast urban areas, while san andreas delivered the feeling of travelling through a state, especially thanks to the "wasted space" - I'd rather call it landscape, as this adds so much to the illusion of a whole state.

of course, again, condense it to the gameplay-relevant areas and you can cope with a fraction of the area used.

[DuPz0r 5361]

map needs to be like this but only bigger

This is a good estimation imo. I don't think it will be much bigger than this(maybe more countryside/desert). The river/lake is well placed too, through a mountain range. I'd be happy with a map this size, if it is densely detailed like IV.

[Drew-Barnes 64]

I'm not too bothered about the actual size of the map, as long as their is no wasted space. San Andreas may have been a bigger map, but there were a lot of areas that seemed to be there for the sake of it. GTA IV had a more compact feel to it because they used every inch of the map for something relevant.

depends on how you define relevant.

if you look at it from a gameplay perspective, you could also settle down and call most parts liberty city wasted space. you could condense the locations of the gameplay to an island about the size of brooker, with a little space in between to give the illusion of actually moving between them.

to deliver a certain feeling to the player, both gta 4 and san andreas did their job very well. liberty really gives you the feeling of an nyc-ish metropolis with vast urban areas, while san andreas delivered the feeling of travelling through a state, especially thanks to the "wasted space" - I'd rather call it landscape, as this adds so much to the illusion of a whole state.

of course, again, condense it to the gameplay-relevant areas and you can cope with a fraction of the area used.

I was referring to the open blank grey space in between and behind most buildings.

[Tj1987 35]

What if the cause of seperation of different portions of the map was forest fires? That's a very plausible, realistic approach. The athorities have decided to seal off parts of the msp due to massive forest fires. All citizens in towns near these locations are advised to stay inside and wait until further notice. You see massive smoke clouds rising trees blocking the road firefighters working as hard as they can to douse the flames. The ground is covered in sut and burned branches...etc etc

[The Invisible Lines 50]

What if the cause of seperation of different portions of the map was forest fires? That's a very plausible, realistic approach. The athorities have decided to seal off parts of the msp due to massive forest fires. All citizens in towns near these locations are advised to stay inside and wait until further notice. You see massive smoke clouds rising trees blocking the road firefighters working as hard as they can to douse the flames. The ground is covered in sut and burned branches...etc etc

That'd be pretty cool, especially if you could use it as a cheat later in the game on various parts of the map (without them being blocked off, though). I still think the best reason for areas being blocked of would be roads and bridges closed due to earthquake damage. That makes so much sense since L.A. practically sits on top of the San Andreas fault. It would be an awesome in-game feature, too (and also as a cheat). I'll actually be a little disappointed/surprised if earthquakes don't play into the game anywhere, but c'est la vie.

Who knows, maybe Rockstar will get rid of the closed map. I doubt it, but you never know. Since they suggest Los Santos is the only city and the only other populated areas are surrounding "towns," it would make sense to have the protag begin the game outside of the city and work through missions to get into LS itself (a la IV when you started in Broker and played your way into Algonquin); however, I still think map-wise, R* has some tricks up its sleeve. I'd actually be surprised if they didn't include San Diego (a sizeable city in its own right) in the game. It's only about 130 miles south of Los Angeles, so it's conceivable it'll be there.

[gmt 60]

I was referring to the open blank grey space in between and behind most buildings.

Oh I see. Thought you were talking bout the loads of open land you won't come across during story progression.

But I think, with the level of detail seen in 4, these areas would not give the feeling of wasted space, as 4 also has lots of this stuff, but thanks to the great care R* put into detailing the map they don't come up as such an eyesore as in SA.

That'd be pretty cool, especially if you could use it as a cheat later in the game on various parts of the map (without them being blocked off, though). I still think the best reason for areas being blocked of would be roads and bridges closed due to earthquake damage. That makes so much sense since L.A. practically sits on top of the San Andreas fault. It would be an awesome in-game feature, too (and also as a cheat). I'll actually be a little disappointed/surprised if earthquakes don't play into the game anywhere, but c'est la vie.

Who knows, maybe Rockstar will get rid of the closed map. I doubt it, but you never know. Since they suggest Los Santos is the only city and the only other populated areas are surrounding "towns," it would make sense to have the protag begin the game outside of the city and work through missions to get into LS itself (a la IV when you started in Broker and played your way into Algonquin); however, I still think map-wise, R* has some tricks up its sleeve. I'd actually be surprised if they didn't include San Diego (a sizeable city in its own right) in the game. It's only about 130 miles south of Los Angeles, so it's conceivable it'll be there.

fires and earthquakes are good, although I must say wildfires are the more suitable option imho, as an earthquake would have too much of a largescale impact on the entireness of the map, while a wildfire is a more or less condensed event that barely hits the outskirts of the city (if the LSFD does it's job right, that is...)

having an earthquake to exclude certain map areas at the beginning would demand too much shit going on throughout the city, (damage, chaos, whatever) to be plausible and not feel artificial just for the sake of having it limit access.

wildfires can block access to entire areas without having to "adjust" large areas of the map to this event to be plausible. Just a roadblock, some LSFD equipment, some lighting adjustments due to the smoke and of course the fire itself.

flooding and mudslides due to heavy rain in the mountains also come to mind as they are pretty much limited in their impact and also realistic for the location, LA is full of flood control for a reason and there's been heavy flooding in the past.

or, as simple as it can get, road construction.

idk there's many ways to limit access at the beginning of the game, but I wonder if it's necessary at all? Ok, it would float down the same river as every GTA, but then again, every GTA was made out of seperate islands (which also made it easy: bridge is closed pizzaboy, find another way home) but this one wont have seperate islands if they stick to the real-life geography. I don't really like it, but I bet R* will come up with a way of doing it

[DuPz0r 5361]

Landslides could be an easy way to physically block entry to another area. That's if they decide to block any areas off.

[ruby-driver_01 0]

I Red somewhere that its supposed to be three times the size of IV and on either side of the map is the size of RDR

[TreeFitty 2631]

That's a rumor.

[UlanBator 40]

On GTAV trailer we see a Jet fighter (Hydra) and a private jet, in San Andreas when we flight those airplanes the game world became very very small, in a few seconds we could be any where. Allmost a "Ocarina of time" 5 notes and we went in to a magical teleportation. This time must be diferent, come on, we need space, from airfield to airfield at least 5 minutes with the hydra in full throlle. I wish!

[X_STRIAGHTEDGE_X 3]

If there's 'only' going to be one city and the countryside then it could be bigger than SA, countryside doesn't have to be that detailed but can still look amazing and be massive (Just Cause 2, probably Red Dead but I haven't played that yet fucking R*) so it could be much bigger than SA, but I still wonder how they will do it for the consoles. I thought they would have just go with Vice City for this generation and then wait for Next Gen to do San Andreas.

As for Airports. I'm guessing you'll have the International Airport in the city. A military base with an airfield. And one or more dust strips like the one in SA.

dude, im sorry, but GTA V to me seems like the ticket out for GTA games, i mean GTA has been around for almost 2 decades and i think R* is thinkin mabye its time to move on, DONT GET ME WRONG i want GTA to be around for ever but i think R* wants to make this a last GTA game evr

I'd imagine a lot of things are confusing to him.

oh lol, know im just saying cuz the amount of pics and shit

[TreeFitty 2631]

Yes. They are going to stop doing the thing that makes them the most money. Tons of sense right there.

[DuPz0r 5361]

This wont be the last GTA. It may well be the last on current generation consoles. But GTA is a household name, and they're not going to stop now...

On GTAV trailer we see a Jet fighter (Hydra) and a private jet, in San Andreas when we flight those airplanes the game world became very very small, in a few seconds we could be any where. Allmost a "Ocarina of time" 5 notes and we went in to a magical teleportation. This time must be diferent, come on, we need space, from airfield to airfield at least 5 minutes with the hydra in full throlle. I wish!

SA did feel small eventually, because in all honesty, it was way out of proportion, and the cities were too close together. That was the best they could do back then, i'm sure there is a way they will optimize GTA V's map to allow more of a playground for us to play in. RDR has proven this.

[gmt 60]

of course this wont be the last GTA. It's one of the best selling entertainment franchises ever, they'd be stupid to call it quits after 5.

Ok, at a certain point down the line as were shown with the Final Fantasy series, ppl just wont give a fuck anymore if like GTA 23 is announced, probably with the 15th time in Liberty City (until this date probably a 1:1 replica of nyc in a virtual reality environment massive multiplayer online carnage), but that shouldn't bother anyone right now.

on topic: I really hope and also think that the map and the usage of jets work well together. I don't expect it to be like JC2 where it takes countless minutes to jet from one corner to the other, but it'll sure as hell be longer and more fun than it was in San Andreas, although I think if technical aspects where suitable to host such big maps back then, R* would have done it already.

[TreeFitty 2631]

Pretty damn sure I just tied together Vinewood with the rest of the map finally:

GTA 5 Landmark page for reference

More stuff to do tomorrow...

[DuPz0r 5361]

Ah looks like you already sorted it Fitty. I did a smart sharpen on the jet image last night to remove a lot of the gaussian/motion blur and forgot to upload it for you before bed.

I noticed a lot of tree's in the foreground and thought that it was probably the observatory area.

[TreeFitty 2631]

I should have asked if you had one of the latest Photoshops or similar that could counter the motion blur. I have the first CS which doesn't have a smart sharpen or whatever else advanced filters to do it.