GTA V Mapped!

[Rayge 689]

What possible reason would there be to include Chicago? Seriously, by reimagined I'm almost 100% sure they don't mean to add a large city on the east coast which could have it's own game.

[Qdeathstar 1763]

No, he was just saying the geological diversity would make the map more interesting.

[Banana Pudding 95]

What possible reason would there be to include Chicago? Seriously, by reimagined I'm almost 100% sure they don't mean to add a large city on the east coast which could have it's own game.

I don't know why I even come to this place. Is this a "special" forum?

[Qdeathstar 1763]

True, chicago isnt even on the east coast...

[BlackSox9 448]

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...

Yeah your probably right, they are similar. And Los Angeles also has Hollywood which San Diego doesn't have.

I would like to have the variation of three very different cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and Las Vegas, but I don't think Rockstar is making GTA V big enough to accomadate all of that.

I can still hope but.

One of the great things about San Andreas was just when you where getting used to Los Santos you got thrown out into the countryside. Then moved to San Fierro, and before that got boring you were sent to the desert and Las Venturas. And by the end when you had accumulated more money, power and respect ( plus got better weapons/ and a jetpack ) you go back to Los Santos to help your almost extinct gang take back all the territory they lost. And become the Boss of Los Santos. Great

[Rayge 689]

Yeah it is true that San Diego is similar to Los Angeles. But it would be a lot more realistic and logical than any other city. To me, and I'm guessing most people, "reimagined" signifies different versions of various things associated with the area, or whatever it is that is reimagined. Not completely different cities that should be there just because.... They were in the last game.

Anyway, I think I'll stop posting on this topic because both of you are positive that San Fierro and Las Venturas will be in the game, simply because they were in the last game set in the state of San Andreas.

Good day, fine gentlemen.

[Joe King 62]

Not completely different cities that should be there just because.... They were in the last game.

thats a very good reason why they should be in the game. "largest and most ambitious game Rockstar has yet created" - if its anything less of what SA had, then its not.

im only believing what R* have revealed (LS and countryside so far). theres no reason for believing those cities wont be in the game though.

[x910 24]

Not completely different cities that should be there just because.... They were in the last game.

thats a very good reason why they should be in the game. "largest and most ambitious game Rockstar has yet created" - if its anything less of what SA had, then its not.

im only believing what R* have revealed (LS and countryside so far). theres no reason for believing those cities wont be in the game though.

Yes exactly.. If it's their most ambitious game as they said, then there would be more than 1 city, may be smaller in size. But if there is only one city ie. LS, then the map might not become "HUGE", IMO.

[Ku Zi Mu 1194]

Not completely different cities that should be there just because.... They were in the last game.

thats a very good reason why they should be in the game. "largest and most ambitious game Rockstar has yet created" - if its anything less of what SA had, then its not.

im only believing what R* have revealed (LS and countryside so far). theres no reason for believing those cities wont be in the game though.

For some reason he can't seem to get the "so far" part through his skull. Must be hard-headed

[Rayge 689]

Fuck that shit, I have to reply.

Jesus fucking christ, let me make an announcement, people don't seem to understand what I'm saying.

I believe there WILL be another city except Los Santos

However, that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be SF or LV. It could be any other city. What I was saying is that San Diego is MORE LIKELY than SF or LV. Why you may ask? Because the game is loosely based on Southern California. Therefore it would make more sense. I know it's not impossible for SF and LV, but the chances are LOWER. It could still be the largest and most ambitious game, but that doesn't mean they have to include the same fucking cities from a previous game, just because they were there before. For all we know, "largest and most ambitious" could be entirely based on things to do in the game, mechanics and graphics. However it could also have something to do with the map, but who knows for certain.

[Banana Pudding 95]

Yeah it is true that San Diego is similar to Los Angeles. But it would be a lot more realistic and logical than any other city.

Don't forget that it's a game and enjoyment is more important than realism and logic.

[Rayge 689]

Yeah it is true that San Diego is similar to Los Angeles. But it would be a lot more realistic and logical than any other city.

Don't forget that it's a game and enjoyment is more important than realism and logic.

True, however it doesn't mean the game has to defy all logic. Some games, like Saint's Row are themed to be like that - just pure fun. Games like GTA (usually) try to evoke a connection with the character and atmosphere, and to some extent aim for semi-realism.

[Ku Zi Mu 1194]

Fuck that shit, I have to reply.

Jesus fucking christ, let me make an announcement, people don't seem to understand what I'm saying.

I believe there WILL be another city except Los Santos

However, that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be SF or LV. It could be any other city. What I was saying is that San Diego is MORE LIKELY than SF or LV. Why you may ask? Because the game is loosely based on Southern California. Therefore it would make more sense. I know it's not impossible for SF and LV, but the chances are LOWER. It could still be the largest and most ambitious game, but that doesn't mean they have to include the same fucking cities from a previous game, just because they were there before. For all we know, "largest and most ambitious" could be entirely based on things to do in the game, mechanics and graphics. However it could also have something to do with the map, but who knows for certain.

Haha It's funny because I'm using the dark skin which makes it much harder to read and thus understand your main point.

*sigh* Still doesn't understand what "so far" means.

[Qdeathstar 1763]

Well, TBH if they are doing San Diego i say they can keep it. A mexican down would be interesting. Border wars and all that jazz. Keeping the dirty mexicans out, sneaking in drugs... would be a lot funner than a mini los santos.

[DuPz0r 5361]

Well, TBH if they are doing San Diego i say they can keep it. A mexican down would be interesting. Border wars and all that jazz. Keeping the dirty mexicans out, sneaking in drugs... would be a lot funner than a mini los santos.

They may as well just chuck a city landscape over the RDR map if they're willing to add mexico. I do like the idea of diverse countrysides though. Like maybe some mountains in one part, then canyons in another part etc, with rural villages speckled between them.

[Qdeathstar 1763]

Well, TBH if they are doing San Diego i say they can keep it. A mexican down would be interesting. Border wars and all that jazz. Keeping the dirty mexicans out, sneaking in drugs... would be a lot funner than a mini los santos.

They may as well just chuck a city landscape over the RDR map if they're willing to add mexico. I do like the idea of diverse countrysides though. Like maybe some mountains in one part, then canyons in another part etc, with rural villages speckled between them.

I wouldnt mind los santos in the middle of an rdr map with a mexican border town thrown in...

[NativeWay 24]

San Diego is plausible. San Feirro and Las Venturas are not coming back, deal with it. Mexican border is less likely, but still makes sense. there IS something over the mountains (possibly a large town, since in California the main cities are coastal) : so it isn't a boundary. the map only appears small in the screenshots, due to the dramatic change from the skyscraper infested New York streets. Los Angeles has a very built up skyline in real life, but i would believe the made a lot of the buildings smaller, made smaller buildings slightly bigger and completely got rid of very small buildings to accommodate jets in a realistic and appreciable way. the map could be massive, at least 1 1/2 to 2 times bigger than gta 4's map excluding the spacing in between the boroughs, and there will just be less tall buildings and more small houses, and detailed wilder biomes.

[Crazee 204]

What if Rockstar do something they've never done before. Have Los Santos, surrounded by mountains and countryside as they've already said. But then have Vice City as another city that you have to get on a plane to go to, Or any other city, Las Vegas, London, Sicily (Catania/Palermo), Tokyo, etc. I know it's rather unlikely but i thought i'd throw it out there.

[Qdeathstar 1763]

Im not a big fan of breaking up the game area like that....

[Rayge 689]

San Feirro and Las Venturas are not coming back, deal with it.

You just got yourself killed.

Haha It's funny because I'm using the dark skin which makes it much harder to read and thus understand your main point.

*sigh* Still doesn't understand what "so far" means.

You're right. I'm a moron. Now, explain to me what "so far means". You still haven't replied to my last post asking you what the reason is you feel so strongly that san fierro and las venturas will be in the game.

[Qdeathstar 1763]

Weve been saying they might, not that they will.... Your the one making exasperated statements about how they wont be in the game....

[Ku Zi Mu 1194]

San Feirro and Las Venturas are not coming back, deal with it.

You just got yourself killed.

Haha It's funny because I'm using the dark skin which makes it much harder to read and thus understand your main point.

*sigh* Still doesn't understand what "so far" means.

You're right. I'm a moron. Now, explain to me what "so far means". You still haven't replied to my last post asking you what the reason is you feel so strongly that san fierro and las venturas will be in the game.

Oh.. that question was for me? Uh let me see.. I'm sure I have an argument up here somewhere.. OH.. there we are. But first (for the 47th time) What I mean buy "so far" is that the only reason R* said reimagined southern california is because that's the only part of the map they want us to know about as of right now. They did the same with San Andreas. I understand that you want to strictly stick to R*s statement and nothing less but come on.

As for your other question.. I don't feel that San Fierro and LV are more likely to return than they are to not return and vise versa. I just feel that you're reason for thinking that they are more probable not to return is a bad reason.

Plus, think of it this way. If R* doesn't want us to know about the full map just yet, why would they tell us the game was based off Southern California if the full map is based off of Southern California? Southern California is big but not that big or diverse to make a good map imo. Southern California could be part 1 of the map, Northern California could be part 2, and Some other city close to Central California could be part 3 of the map. (Assuming theres 3 core parts of the map like most GTAs) I just can't see R* giving up the opportunity to design an HD San Francisco in full detail like that. Imagine the GG Bridge, man!

[BlackSox9 448]

What if Rockstar do something they've never done before. Have Los Santos, surrounded by mountains and countryside as they've already said. But then have Vice City as another city that you have to get on a plane to go to, Or any other city, Las Vegas, London, Sicily (Catania/Palermo), Tokyo, etc. I know it's rather unlikely but i thought i'd throw it out there.

It would be cool if you could travel to other cities like that.

But I think Vice City deserves a game of it's own. It will probably be the next GTA ( after V ) to be released, and will probably have the most detailed game world we have ever seen. I Can't Wait .

[Rayge 689]

Weve been saying they might, not that they will.... Your the one making exasperated statements about how they wont be in the game....

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?

I've been saying how they probably won't, trying to explain why. Not that they definitely won't, that they probablywont. Of course I might be wrong, but so might you, Kuz and Banana Pudding. And Banana Pudding hasn't been saying they might be in the game, he seems pretty sure they will be.

Plus, think of it this way. If R* doesn't want us to know about the full map just yet, why would they tell us the game was based off Southern California if the full map is based off of Southern California? Southern California is big but not that big or diverse to make a good map imo. Southern California could be part 1 of the map, Northern California could be part 2, and Some other city close to Central California could be part 3 of the map. (Assuming theres 3 core parts of the map like most GTAs) I just can't see R* giving up the opportunity to design an HD San Francisco in full detail like that. Imagine the GG Bridge, man!

"Grand Theft Auto V focuses on the pursuit of the almighty dollar in a re-imagined, present day Southern California."

To me, this says the game is based in Southern California. Just because they say that doesn't mean the entire map is revealed, we know nothing of the map so far, just an idea of where the game is set - there's a difference. However, I understand what you're trying to say. The problem is that interpretation varies for everyone, so the only way we'll know for certain is when they physically release an image of the map.

And I'm almost positive they're not passing up on creating a HD version of SF and LV, but I would rather they save them for their own games for later. Companies have a large selection of fantastic ideas and concepts, but they release them slowly, deliberately leaving out certain features that they can include in their next game/product, like the iPhone and many others. Imagine Rockstar made a GTA in a few years where you could go from LV to SF to LS to LC and loads of other cities by plane, in full HD with all the content imaginable. What then, once that game has had it's time?

[Ku Zi Mu 1194]

I just feel that your reason for thinking that they are more PROBABLE not to return is a bad reason.