GTA V Mapped!

[Rayge 689]

Don't forget, this isn't the same map as GTA San Andreas, it's a brand new one.

^That^. Just because we have Los Santos, and just because it is in the state of San Andreas, does NOT mean we will have the other cities or even the same names for places (Chiliad for example).

I doubt Mt. Chiliad will be changed, but you never know. I don't think Rockstar would change the monumental landmarks that represent what the game is.

[OptimumPx 329]

Don't forget, this isn't the same map as GTA San Andreas, it's a brand new one.

^That^. Just because we have Los Santos, and just because it is in the state of San Andreas, does NOT mean we will have the other cities or even the same names for places (Chiliad for example).

I doubt Mt. Chiliad will be changed, but you never know. I don't think Rockstar would change the monumental landmarks that represent what the game is.

They can, they will, and they have. This isn't GTA: San Andreas after all.

The only locations that are confirmed to exist between SA and V are all based on actual buildings in LA, but even there there are changes to the "monumental landmarks that represent what the game is".

The Vinewood sign looks bigger and is further away from the rest of the city. The skyscrapers of downtown have all been changed around with some being added and some deleted from SA to V.

Verona Beach is being renamed (Vespucci Beach), as is the Santa Maria Pier (Pleasure Pier). And keep in mind those are all real buildings and places like I said...Mt. Chiliad isn't actually based on a real mountain in and of itself. There is no guarantee.

[ViceMan 1380]

You only have to look at the changes to LC between III an IV, no placenames were reused. There was no Portland, Staunton and Shoreside Vale. It was all new.

[OptimumPx 329]

You only have to look at the changes to LC between III an IV, no placenames were reused. There was no Portland, Staunton and Shoreside Vale. It was all new.

The only problem is, to be fair, they did reuse one or two and look to be doing to same this time...but barely.

IV: Francis International Airport

V: East Los Santos, Vinewood

But again keep in mind those are all real places.

[Guest Marney1]

A lot could have changed in the 20 years since San Andreas.

[TreeFitty 2631]

Map/Analysis updated.

Real life intersection of Windward and Pacific Aves:

Los Santos Map Approx.:

[DuPz0r 5361]

You only have to look at the changes to LC between III an IV, no placenames were reused. There was no Portland, Staunton and Shoreside Vale. It was all new.

The only problem is, to be fair, they did reuse one or two and look to be doing to same this time...but barely.

IV: Francis International Airport

V: East Los Santos, Vinewood

But again keep in mind those are all real places.

But, the rest of the GTA universe is based on real places. There is a chance that they could re-use names. The LS-I Airport is most likely. I can only really remember a small handful of Los Santos regions; Vinewood, Idlewood, Ganton, Jefferson, Richman. These could all be in the new GTA.

[tnz 6]

I think there will be small airfields in the countryside, for example for the crop-duster. So I guess flying will be part of the game again.

As for size, try to estimate the height of a skyscraper (amount of floors will help), see the displayed size of the building from a given scene, such as near the oilfields, and it should be possible to calculate an estimated distance = first indication of size. Of course there may be areas so far from the skyscrapers that this doesn't apply, but might at least help to grasp the size of Los Santos itself.

[TreeFitty 2631]

I was thinking about using estimation techniques but you need angles and such which are hard to estimate so the final estimation could be way off.

[Deniz Mert Yayla 0]

I realize San Andreas covered three cities and surrounding countryside, but everything was shrunk down and the cities were far smaller than any real city.

If there will be a big countryside, heights, forests or something like that, it will be realistic. deers or cows will go well with those scenery. cmon, losting in the nature will be cool, istnt it?

[rm80rams 62]

Adding San Diego instead of LV and SF would be nice. and in between they would have the countryside, desert and mountains.

[Rayge 689]

You only have to look at the changes to LC between III an IV, no placenames were reused. There was no Portland, Staunton and Shoreside Vale. It was all new.

The only problem is, to be fair, they did reuse one or two and look to be doing to same this time...but barely.

IV: Francis International Airport

V: East Los Santos, Vinewood

But again keep in mind those are all real places.

So what, Mt Diablo isn't a real place?

[Edgecrusher 91]

I can't recall if the trailer actually mentions it as being Mount Chiliad, but if not, isn't it possible that it could be an entirely different mountain altogether? There is, after all, more than one mountain in the real life California and given improvements since SA was released it's not unreasonable to assume that this will be reflected in the game.

[gmt 60]

I can't recall if the trailer actually mentions it as being Mount Chiliad, but if not, isn't it possible that it could be an entirely different mountain altogether? There is, after all, more than one mountain in the real life California and given improvements since SA was released it's not unreasonable to assume that this will be reflected in the game.

That's my guess aswell. There's so many mountains around LA, the mountain seen could be any of these. Plus the fact that we only saw what's adjecent to LS and Mt Chiliad clearly belongs to SF. I think, beside some storyline teasing, the next trailer (or at least upcoming news) will give us some more information about what's outside LS and then we see whether they will include other big cities or not.

[OptimumPx 329]

You only have to look at the changes to LC between III an IV, no placenames were reused. There was no Portland, Staunton and Shoreside Vale. It was all new.

The only problem is, to be fair, they did reuse one or two and look to be doing to same this time...but barely.

IV: Francis International Airport

V: East Los Santos, Vinewood

But again keep in mind those are all real places.

So what, Mt Diablo isn't a real place?

To be honest I'd never heard of Mt. Diablo before today. Going by it's Wiki page you might be right about it being an inspiration for Mt. Chiliad, but Rockstar's never said anything about it one way or the other.

However, Mt. Diablo is up in the San Fransisco Bay Area, nowhere near Los Angeles. At this point I'm 90% sure that GTA V won't include San Fierro or Las Venturas so it still seems to me that Mt. Chiliad (in any Mt. Diablo appearance) is out. But they could still reuse the name for one of the new mountains, even if it doesn't look the same.

[Rayge 689]

You only have to look at the changes to LC between III an IV, no placenames were reused. There was no Portland, Staunton and Shoreside Vale. It was all new.

The only problem is, to be fair, they did reuse one or two and look to be doing to same this time...but barely.

IV: Francis International Airport

V: East Los Santos, Vinewood

But again keep in mind those are all real places.

So what, Mt Diablo isn't a real place?

To be honest I'd never heard of Mt. Diablo before today. Going by it's Wiki page you might be right about it being an inspiration for Mt. Chiliad, but Rockstar's never said anything about it one way or the other.

However, Mt. Diablo is up in the San Fransisco Bay Area, nowhere near Los Angeles. At this point I'm 90% sure that GTA V won't include San Fierro or Las Venturas so it still seems to me that Mt. Chiliad (in any Mt. Diablo appearance) is out. But they could still reuse the name for one of the new mountains, even if it doesn't look the same.

Yeah. I am 99% sure Mt Chiliad is a parody of Mt. Diablo, since Chiliad is also near SF. Anyway, as you said it doesn't have to be located by San Fierro, they could just make a mountain near LA and call it Chiliad, if they were even going to use the name.

[Guest Marney1]

It would make everything easier if Rockstar just used the real names. They could have called IV 'GTA: New York' if they wanted. Maybe this is for a different discussion but I don't think it's worthy of its own topic so it's going here.

[gmt 60]

what other mountain than Mt Diablo should Mt Chiliad represent?

Mt. Diablo: Big mountain near San Francisco "famous" for it's downhill bike races.

Mt. Chiliad: Big mountain near San Fiero "famous" for it's downhill bike races.

[Rayge 689]

It would make everything easier if Rockstar just used the real names. They could have called IV 'GTA: New York' if they wanted. Maybe this is for a different discussion but I don't think it's worthy of its own topic so it's going here.

GTA: New York, GTA :San Francisco and GTA: Los Angeles will probably come someday in the distant future.

[gmt 60]

I just took the 6 scenes that show downtown from afar, estimated the POV and distances and put it over a screenshot of LA in google maps, all starting with the marina. I didn't want to take a look at the shape and correct size of the map, but more approximate locations and therefore resulting dimensions.

here's the result:

note that, as I could have started with any other location estimated in the trailer breakdown as a starting point for this, the size of the circles compared to the underlying map would be different. i took the marina as it is the first scene and made my way though it, The map was a reference to work with rather than anything to base a map shape of. TreeFitty is better and further at this anyway ^^

What I realized is that, while the perspective of the golf course (as well as it's design) seem to be based on LA Country Club, the apparent distance to downtown, compared to the distance in the 3rd scene with what seems to be the marina towers, is considerably higher than it would be in a downscaled replica of LA (unless R* used different fields of depth).

Compared to draw distances in GTA4, which I guess will be the same in 5 as we're looking at a game running on the same engine, this leads me to the conclusion - next to that the map is an approximate interpretation rather than a recreation - that we're basically looking at a rather "small" city of Los Santos, maybe about the size of the land-areas of LC. Plus the surounding landscape and the absence of other big cities, I guess the map will be slightly bigger than LC, which means about the size of the entire map of San Andreas, but with only one big city of course.

[Rayge 689]

I just took the 6 scenes that show downtown from afar, estimated the POV and distances and put it over a screenshot of LA in google maps, all starting with the marina. I didn't want to take a look at the shape and correct size of the map, but more approximate locations and therefore resulting dimensions.

here's the result:

note that, as I could have started with any other location estimated in the trailer breakdown as a starting point for this, the size of the circles compared to the underlying map would be different. i took the marina as it is the first scene and made my way though it, The map was a reference to work with rather than anything to base a map shape of. TreeFitty is better and further at this anyway ^^

What I realized is that, while the perspective of the golf course (as well as it's design) seem to be based on LA Country Club, the apparent distance to downtown, compared to the distance in the 3rd scene with what seems to be the marina towers, is considerably higher than it would be in a downscaled replica of LA (unless R* used different fields of depth).

Compared to draw distances in GTA4, which I guess will be the same in 5 as we're looking at a game running on the same engine, this leads me to the conclusion - next to that the map is an approximate interpretation rather than a recreation - that we're basically looking at a rather "small" city of Los Santos, maybe about the size of the land-areas of LC. Plus the surounding landscape and the absence of other big cities, I guess the map will be slightly bigger than LC, which means about the size of the entire map of San Andreas, but with only one big city of course.

San Andreas was what? 13 sq miles? That isn't big at all, compared to RDR which was 26. I would be slightly disappointed if it wasn't at least 20 sq miles, 1/2 city 1/2 nature. Oh and It would be so sick to have an island off the coast that is free from the law with an airstrip, like an island controlled by gangsters and pirates.

[Guest Marney1]

Don't expect Rockstar to ever tell us how big GTA V is compared to any other game, it's something they don't discuss. What the big deal is I'm not sure but it's true.

[Mittah76 2]

They said gta IV was too small for airplanes, this comes to this statement:

That its way bigger than GTA IV

[kcooper711 1]

@OPX Then now we need a reason for getting shot at for simply taking a swim.

IV never game you a reason for it tbh.

The bridges were closed, yes. I can see why you would get a wanted level for trying to cross the closed bridge. But when you swam to Algonquin far away from any of the bridges you still got it.

Maybe there will be a problem with flooding in the LS river and you can't cross it. Of maybe there's a problem with a freeway overpass and that blocks off the roads going to another section of town. I dunno.

GTA IV did give you a reason for why you don't leave Broker at the beginning of the game. "Why don't you show me around the rest of the city?" "Fucking Terrorists!" "What?" "Terrorists! There's been a big scare, and you cannot cross the bridges so good. You on VISA, I'll stay in Broker, FUCK IT I'd stay in Hove Beach."

That's why you got massive amount of wanted level when you left Broker (no matter how you left it)

[Guest Marney1]

@OPX Then now we need a reason for getting shot at for simply taking a swim.

IV never game you a reason for it tbh.

The bridges were closed, yes. I can see why you would get a wanted level for trying to cross the closed bridge. But when you swam to Algonquin far away from any of the bridges you still got it.

Maybe there will be a problem with flooding in the LS river and you can't cross it. Of maybe there's a problem with a freeway overpass and that blocks off the roads going to another section of town. I dunno.

GTA IV did give you a reason for why you don't leave Broker at the beginning of the game. "Why don't you show me around the rest of the city?" "Fucking Terrorists!" "What?" "Terrorists! There's been a big scare, and you cannot cross the bridges so good. You on VISA, I'll stay in Broker, FUCK IT I'd stay in Hove Beach."

That's why you got massive amount of wanted level when you left Broker (no matter how you left it)

Thanks Sherlock, welcome to the forums!