GTA V Confirmed to be only Los Santos

[wickedsick 3]

ok, i must confess: that´s truly an option.. but it´s still my opinion that there will/must be more cities, as long as the game isn´t out, or alternatively it´s not proof in another way. rockstar will definitively surprise us, just like they did with their sudden resolve to announce the game officially.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROkACxoi8t8&feature=related

Just found this video on youtube. Also watch part 2, that´s pretty interesting.

[OptimumPx 329]

There are vineyards a thousand times closer to LA then San Jose.

In fact after about a minute of googling I found one in Topanga, CA (the Milan Vineyards) about 39 minutes west of LA.

[wickedsick 3]

of coure there are more vineyards closer to la, than those in san jose, but it´s still an option. i don´t know what could be true or false in this video, but it´s interesting anyway..

[OptimumPx 329]

His video implies that the vineyards are all out by San Jose, and it's 7 hours from them to the wind turbines, which is a load of bunk.

Just sayin'.

[MisterPerfecto 1]

Whatever,1 citiy is enough!

Look at Sa,all three cities was very small. Now image how big and detailed Los Santos will be. Also a very big County. I think SF and LV will return in a Add-on maybe? But one thing I dont understand!

We saw a Shamal (Privat Jet) in the end of the trailer. If we are able to fly a private,we need a second big airport! Thats will be weird ,only 1 Airport in Los Santos? At the one hand I cant image that privat jets land behind a small town at a small landing field but the other hand we cant see big planes like the AT-400 in San Andreas in the trailer

1 huge and detailed city with a large county is better than tree smaller and fewer details

[TreeFitty 2631]

Small planes don't need a big airport.

[wickedsick 3]

Wir werden sehen.. In IV lief im Fernsehen auch einiges über LV mit Glücksspiel etc. Sowas wär schon was tolles. Glücksspiel in Casinos etc..

We will see. In IV there was a lot in the telly about LV and Gambling etc. I would like that. Gambling in Casinos etc..

[Stefan Dumitrache 0]

no need to complain for Las Venturas or San Fierro yet, gta5 will sure have at least 2 dlc, might aswell be these cities, with new stories or continuing the one from Los Santos.

[gmt 60]

very much to my liking.

I'd rather delve into one bigass city with loads of details and a nice rural area around it with maybe a handfull of smaller towns than that what happened in San Andreas. Don't get me wrong, the gameplay was the best of all GTAs imho and with all the countryside it really felt huge and, more important, like an authentic state, but the cities where a joke in terms of size.

Now with the focus on one city plus it's backdrop I guess we will get a Los Santos that will live up to it's standard (in terms of what it's supposed to be in the GTA world) size-wise and with the backdrop will feel like an authentic city. I don't know yet how they will cut out the city limits, which was surely easy with limiting the scenery to islands, but I guess R* will come up with something good here (there's rumors about infinite desert and mountains higher than the vertical limit achievable w/o cheating) so we can be sure it suits the needs.

After all, I guess we can be happy that 5 is limited to one big city and not turns out to be a San Andreas 2.0. I have a feeling such thing wouldn't live up to the expectations... yet

[City of Dis 16]

I don't understand why everyone thinks that Rockstar can't pull off 3 cities with the level of detail you're imagining Los Santos to exhibit.

I mean look at Skyrim. Just look at the mindblowing vastness of that game. Bethesda started it in 2007-2008. That's when Rockstar started Grand Theft Auto V. So why couldn't Rockstar replicate the level of detail of Skyrim but have it in Grand Theft Auto?

[wickedsick 3]

I don't understand why everyone thinks that Rockstar can't pull off 3 cities with the level of detail you're imagining Los Santos to exhibit.

exactly.. almost four years of development and the game engine was already done in IV. just look at RDR, i thinkt it was more complex than GTA IV and was much bigger. So why shouldn´t there be more big cities? people were arguing the same way when SA was announced: it´s too big, that´s not possible. SA was bigger than any GTA ever when it was released, AND they fixed a problem that influenced the gameplay negatively: no loading screen between the map sections like those in GTA III and VC.

[Synch 476]

Dude, LA county alone is bigger than many east coast states.

You can drive through the valley and go through a dozen cities.

Quite a few on the west side as well, which is obviously included

in the game since you can see Venice Beach and Santa Monica.

I hated driving from San Jo to LA, it's not anything like

the relationship in SA that San Fierro was so close to LS.

Silicon Valley is an hour south of San Francisco.

LA is at the fastest at least 6-7 hours drive south of San Jo.

It's not known for it's wineries, except for Almaden.

Wine country is Napa Valley and Central California.

The wineries I saw in LA were in the Los Feliz, Glendale, Burbank area.

The game could easily be centered in one basic area of LA.

To all the people that are mentioning earthquakes, that

is how San Andreas got it's name - it's the big fault in California.

I was around for the Loma Prieta quake in SF, bit not the big Northridge quake in LA.

[Stefan Dumitrache 0]

a virtual city is way more detailed than a virtual wilderness/wasteland. in gtaIV world more things/elements/aspects have to fit together in a functional way, while in RDR such constrains are much more permissive (smaller towns, fewer routines, etc). rockstar can't possibly rush a big city just to please eager fans. so i don't think more than one city would be... how should i put it... feasable right now. however, if it will be true that for a first time the land is not an island, but a continent (thus half ocean, half desert) i'd expect them to simply restrict the player from going on the other side of the mountains, but also have a blocked tunel (in construction), like that one from shoreside vale in gta3. this would give rockstar the "hinge" to unblock a new area of the map with a new dlc and a new city, like las venturas or san fierro.

[rm80rams 62]

but this was already said around a month ago. why are people now "confirming" it will only be the countryside. i read the article and i dont believe that "confirms" anything

[Qdeathstar 1763]

I was pretty sure it was just los santos until i read that article.... I don't think this confirms just Los Santos, in my opinion in points towards all three cities..

I will stick to exactly what's in the press release. It's Los Santos and the surrounding counryside - and a very big map.

1. Los Santos is in it.

and

2. Surrounding countryside

and

3. a very big map.

Also, he says he'll stick to exactly whats in the press release. If it's just Los Santos and countryside, while qualify it by saying "i'll be sticking to the press release". I think that his statement makes it more likely that it will contain the other cities... (or at least one additional city).

[DiO 4730]

Im still hopeful there are more cities. It gives the game more flavor. SA's cities had so much more differentiation than any other GTA game.

[City of Dis 16]

I was pretty sure it was just los santos until i read that article.... I don't think this confirms just Los Santos, in my opinion in points towards all three cities..

I will stick to exactly what's in the press release. It's Los Santos and the surrounding counryside - and a very big map.

1. Los Santos is in it.

and

2. Surrounding countryside

and

3. a very big map.

Also, he says he'll stick to exactly whats in the press release. If it's just Los Santos and countryside, while qualify it by saying "i'll be sticking to the press release". I think that his statement makes it more likely that it will contain the other cities... (or at least one additional city).

Actually, this makes a lot of sense. His reluctance to say anything outside the press release suggests that there is more to it than the press release.

[NOFXGUY25 0]

i think it boils down to common sense,Rockstar should put san fierro,las venturas and surrounding countryside into the game because us (the consumers) know of such places and if we buy the game they arent on there well we will be pretty pissed off the game wont sell very well and rockstar should know that,unless they release those cities as extentions (like lost and damned and gay tony) someone has probably said this before.

but the question that is really on my mind is the radio stations,oh god the radio stations.

[Massacre 7646]

Not including San Fierro and Las Venturas wouldn't affect GTA V's sales at all.

[wickedsick 3]

I was pretty sure it was just los santos until i read that article.... I don't think this confirms just Los Santos, in my opinion in points towards all three cities..

I will stick to exactly what's in the press release. It's Los Santos and the surrounding counryside - and a very big map.

1. Los Santos is in it.

and

2. Surrounding countryside

and

3. a very big map.

Also, he says he'll stick to exactly whats in the press release. If it's just Los Santos and countryside, while qualify it by saying "i'll be sticking to the press release". I think that his statement makes it more likely that it will contain the other cities... (or at least one additional city).

Actually, this makes a lot of sense. His reluctance to say anything outside the press release suggests that there is more to it than the press release.

WORD! Looks like there are people who understand what i mean..

[Mercy 30]

Lol'd at the use of the word word.

[Rayge 689]

i think it boils down to common sense,Rockstar should put san fierro,las venturas and surrounding countryside into the game because us (the consumers) know of such places and if we buy the game they arent on there well we will be pretty pissed off the game wont sell very well and rockstar should know that,unless they release those cities as extentions (like lost and damned and gay tony) someone has probably said this before.

but the question that is really on my mind is the radio stations,oh god the radio stations.

100% wrong.

[Tino Roelofs 2]

it is a great feeling to hear this

[RentedH1tm4nBen 1]

There MUST BE more cities than one. Remember all previous GTA titles: There always where at least three main cities or city parts. GTA - three areas of a city. GTA 2 also. GTA III: Portland Island, Staunton Island and Shoreside Vale. GTA: Vice City: Vice City Main Land, Vice City Beach, Starfish Island and Prawn Island. (It´s been a while, so i don´t remember wich one u had to unlock). GTA: San Andreas: Los Santos, San Fierro and Las Venturas. GTA IV: Bohan, Dukes, Algonquin, Broker and last but not least: Alderney. R* is still holding back informations. I don´t think that they will create a game with a map, where you can go wherever you want from the first second you are playing. And a "small county" outside Los Santos wouldn´t be worth it.

yes, then why would boats be in the game, just to travel from a dock to a nather?

i have good news, possibly its not true, look at the first GTA San Andreas trailer, same and shows some actors whit slow music and ONLY IN LOS SANTOS

and the second trailer show more characters whit faster musiccheck them out, ah and also at the end of gta sa's trailer the GTA SA logo fades in and out as the same way as GTA V's logo

[VeryLight 5]

Look at San Andreas trailer evolution http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sxZ1x6I57s 1st one city, then the all state. Same thing will be with GTA5.