Banana Pudding 95 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 Some of you people sure do get upset when someone suggests Los Santos is small. I figure if I bothered you so much, you'd want to shut me up or make me look like a fool and the best way to do that would be to show that my estimates are baseless and inaccurate. No one has because they can't. Every argument against me is based on unlikely assumptions. The person who made some claims was unable to back them up and has shown that he's probably a liar. All of my estimates are objective. I'm not skewing anything to make the map look small. Some more stuff... Back to this pic - http://i.imgur.com/wfb8w.jpg The ship picture is in first person. The Statue of Happiness is in third person camera mode. Even taking into account the size differences of background objects in different perspectives, the size differences increase/decrease at a greater rate than distance traveled. For instance, a short distance on the map has a large effect on the sizes of objects. If two similarly sized objects appear to be the same size in different pictures, then they're probably about the same distance away. Perspective can alter that and we'll get to that later. In the above image, the distance from the ship to the Empire State Building appears to be about the same as the distance from the oil well to the Bank Tower. It's unknown if the oil well picture is in first or third person mode. It's probably in first person since that would make the city appear larger. Anyway, here's a large size of the ship picture from the trailer - http://i.imgur.com/sRDSl.jpg Here are a couple of pictures I took from the same spot. One is in first person like the trailer and the other is in third person... Assuming the oil well picture is in third person, you'd have to add that extra distance above to the known distance from the ship to the Empire State Building to get a decent estimate of the distance in the oil well pic. Applying that to TreeFitty's map, you get the maximum estimated size here: If the oil well picture is in first person, TreeFitty's map would be significantly smaller. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ku Zi Mu 1194 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 So basically you're trying to prove that there has to be more cities in the game because you think Los Santos is less than 2 thirds of L.C. and that wouldn't be enough urban area? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qdeathstar 1763 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 Sounds reasonable to me..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Banana Pudding 95 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 So basically you're trying to prove that there has to be more cities in the game because you think Los Santos is less than 2 thirds of L.C. and that wouldn't be enough urban area? I think there should be at least the same amount of city area as IV and it doesn't seem likely that there would only be a few skyscrapers in the whole game. Also, if that's the only downtown area, would they have shown it all in one image that early? I wish I knew which view that oil well picture was in. It's probably in first person since that would make the city appear larger and that would make the most sense. I'm just having some fun with it all and seeing how well I can predict how the map will be set up. It'll be interesting to compare when the game is finally released. If it's really inaccurate, we can all have a laugh. I'm going to avoid all message boards though. I don't want anything spoiled. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PedestrianRiotz 93 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 Interesting. To be honest I've always firmly believed there will be more than 1 city just because Los Santos really doesn't look that big and as mentioned before very few skyscrapers. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TreeFitty 2631 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 very few skyscrapers. It's LA not NYC. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cuda 939 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 yo i wanna get into this gta shit, yo look, i hope dat los santos map is dope yo peace Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayge 689 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they won't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qdeathstar 1763 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 How do you know that? Welcome to the launch of the official Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas website. Welcome to Los Santos. Featuring the debut of the very first San Andreas trailer. In grand Grand Theft Auto fashion' date=' much more is always to come. For the first word on all web updates and other announcements, make sure you're on either the Grand Theft Auto or the Rockstar mailing list at the links provided below. [/quote'] Using that announcement as a basis of what the game will contain, certainly seems to point to a game set only in los santos.... Guess which game that announcement is for? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayge 689 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they probably won't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qdeathstar 1763 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 You mean, your opinion is that they wont. His opinion is that they might. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Banana Pudding 95 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they won't. Chicken or the egg? I originally thought it was just Los Santos with maybe some small towns. It was only after trying to figure out the size of the map and seeing that it could be small that I realized other cities are possible. If there aren't other cities, then there would likely have to be large areas of sparsely populated suburban sprawl. I don't think that would make a good game environment. If there are other cities, which ones are likely? Would they dedicate time and resources creating a city like San Diego? San Diego is similar to LA, so that would mean the game has two cities that for the most part look and feel the same. Also, most people don't know anything about San Diego. If you ask the majority of GTA fans what San Diego is famous for, the replies would mostly be, "Uhhh...hmmm... the Chargers?" Would Rockstar introduce a city like that in their most ambitious game? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PedestrianRiotz 93 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 very few skyscrapers. It's LA not NYC. I know this. But what I'm saying is with there only being a few skyscrapers it makes it look smaller to me. And I didn't say he was doing it to prove there were more cities. People need to read what they're actually apparently "reading". I do believe there will be more cities but I just don't believe they will be the same 2 cities we saw in San Andreas. I believe they will be totally different and new. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ku Zi Mu 1194 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they probably won't. How the hell is it probable? Because you think so? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Banana Pudding 95 Report post Posted September 30, 2012 I decided to take another picture like this ( http://i.imgur.com/RO6cw.jpg ) in third person. Here - That's from about the same distance as the first picture and the buildings still appear to be around the same height. As you can see, the GTA V trailer is in a wider format. That just extends the sides. It doesn't skew anything. See here - http://www.moviesbys.../widescreen.htm If you resize them to make them the same height, you can just crop the sides. The vertical view is the same - http://i.imgur.com/GgbrT.jpg Doing the same thing with the GTA pics gives you this - http://i.imgur.com/FdhdH.jpg As shown, the third person view didn't add much distance to the first person estimate. Some of that is because I originally erred on the side of caution. The Chrysler Building appears smaller than the Bank Tower in the first picture. Taking all of that into account, TreeFitty's map would be this size - Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlackSox9 448 Report post Posted October 1, 2012 He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they probably won't. San Fierro and Las Venturas might not return, but perhaps there might be a variation of San Diego. San Diego would be a great additional city because of the violent reputation of it's gangs. It might even be considered more dangerous than Los Angeles. Especially with the increase in power the Mexican Drug Cartels have over the local gangs there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayge 689 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 Yeah that's what I've been trying to say. He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they probably won't. How the hell is it probable? Because you think so? Because from my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) San Francisco and Las Vegas aren't part of Southern California, or the surrounding areas of Los Angeles. How is it probable that they will return? There is no evidence or suggestion whatsoever indicating that they will, so please, enlighten me on why they will return. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joe King 62 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 Yeah that's what I've been trying to say. He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they probably won't. How the hell is it probable? Because you think so? Because from my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) San Francisco and Las Vegas aren't part of Southern California, or the surrounding areas of Los Angeles. How is it probable that they will return? There is no evidence or suggestion whatsoever indicating that they will, so please, enlighten me on why they will return. no offence but after reading your comment i cant get this song out of my head. goes something like: dum dum-dum dum duuuuuum he didnt say they are likely to return, just there is nothing to suggest they wont. you said they probably wont with nothing to back that up with. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qdeathstar 1763 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 Yeah that's what I've been trying to say. He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they probably won't. How the hell is it probable? Because you think so? Because from my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) San Francisco and Las Vegas aren't part of Southern California, or the surrounding areas of Los Angeles. How is it probable that they will return? There is no evidence or suggestion whatsoever indicating that they will, so please, enlighten me on why they will return. Well, it says reimagined southern california... Who says how far they can reimagine it. I dont know how you can go back to san andreas, without going back to san andreas. The liscense plates say san andreas.... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayge 689 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 Yeah that's what I've been trying to say. He's not trying to prove just that there is more than 1 city, he's trying to prove that San Fierro and Las Venturas will return - which they probably won't. How the hell is it probable? Because you think so? Because from my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) San Francisco and Las Vegas aren't part of Southern California, or the surrounding areas of Los Angeles. How is it probable that they will return? There is no evidence or suggestion whatsoever indicating that they will, so please, enlighten me on why they will return. Well, it says reimagined southern california... Who says how far they can reimagine it. I dont know how you can go back to san andreas, without going back to san andreas. The liscense plates say san andreas.... Yeah, I guess it depends entirely on your own opinion on how far Rockstar will "re-imagine" Southern California. If GTA IV is any clue, they're heading for a somewhat realistic approach, further decreasing the chances of SF and LV. And even if they did, each city would have to be substantially smaller than if only LS and 1 more were included, or they would have to greatly cut back on a lot of detail. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qdeathstar 1763 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 Why would they have to cut back on detail for? Los Santos doesnt appear as massive as gtaiv was in its self.... Maybe 2/3 the size... Your assuming way to much as to what is impossible.... Gtaiv might have been realistic, but if your looking for a trend look to the total evolution of the game.... Lotd and bogt.... Moving toward less realism. Also, the map wasnt realistic in gtaiv anyway.... How can you go back to san andreas without going back to san andreas. Only including los santos would be extremely bad optics... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayge 689 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 What I meant was, I don't think it's possible to include 3 large scale cities, in full detail. And we're heading back to the state of San Andreas, not the game. It could just be a part of San Andreas, rather than the whole state. The map was also more realistic than any other GTA before, obviously because it was part of the next generation. I'm also not saying they will only include Los Santos, because that's pretty obvious. What I'm saying is that it's more likely to include a version of San Diego in a GTA version of Southern California rather than SF and LV. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Banana Pudding 95 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 This is to get an idea of the north/south distance of the city. The helicopter picture shows a good portion of Los Santos from north to south. The Bank Tower is 1,018 feet tall and the Vincent Thomas Bridge is 365 feet tall. Assuming they're scaled correctly, this is what the Bank Tower would look like next to the V.T. Bridge - This next picture shows the size difference of the Empire State Building in IV from different distances away - This is a side by side comparison - Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Qdeathstar 1763 Report post Posted October 3, 2012 What I meant was, I don't think it's possible to include 3 large scale cities, in full detail. And we're heading back to the state of San Andreas, not the game. It could just be a part of San Andreas, rather than the whole state. The map was also more realistic than any other GTA before, obviously because it was part of the next generation. I'm also not saying they will only include Los Santos, because that's pretty obvious. What I'm saying is that it's more likely to include a version of San Diego in a GTA version of Southern California rather than SF and LV. Well, isnt san diego just like los angelos? Id like more variation then that... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Banana Pudding 95 Report post Posted October 4, 2012 Well, isnt san diego just like los angelos? Id like more variation then that... That's why I think San Diego would be a terrible choice for another city. If the first city was something like Chicago, then San Diego would be okay. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
