Recommended Posts

I'd just like to point out that Bannana Pud = Fail

Not so fast, dipshit. In case you didn't notice, I only estimated the size of the urban center of the city. Look again - http://i.imgur.com/TXRDf.jpg

I didn't even include the observatory because it's on a mountain. The city area still appears the size I estimated it to be. There's just going to be lots and lots of suburban sprawl in the hills and outer areas.

And I agree with Kuz, you failed quite badly on this Banana Pudding. Not only is the map not smaller than GTA IV, it is actually a lot bigger.

You're as dumb as that bastard above. You're like the retard twins.

Did you really think I was estimating the size of the entire map? It even says "Los Santos city area". ySZ2i.gif

Dude. We were estimating the size of the city in order to show that the city was too small and therefore miltiple cities had to be in the game. We were wrong. Fail. Ect.

Also, I think Marcus kinda threw you off, Pud, not once did I think you were refering to the whole map, that's on him. You were referring to LS though and you were wrong. That's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude. We were estimating the size of the city in order to show that the city was too small and therefore miltiple cities had to be in the game. We were wrong. Fail. Ect.

At this point, my estimate still stands. Nothing has been proven wrong about it. There's just a lot of sprawl around it that they didn't show in the first trailer. When they announced the Spring release date, they even added the word "sprawling" to their description of the city.

I knew there had to be more and instead of having another city, they're just spreading Los Santos beyond the hills. I would have preferred a separate city to travel to rather than just one big spread-out city which is what they created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you beating a dead horse? No ones fighting anymore, I'm over that little hiccup and I'm sure Pud is too -_-

Dude. We were estimating the size of the city in order to show that the city was too small and therefore miltiple cities had to be in the game. We were wrong. Fail. Ect.

At this point, my estimate still stands. Nothing has been proven wrong about it. There's just a lot of sprawl around it that they didn't show in the first trailer. When they announced the Spring release date, they even added the word "sprawling" to their description of the city.

I knew there had to be more and instead of having another city, they're just spreading Los Santos beyond the hills. I would have preferred a separate city to travel to rather than just one big spread-out city which is what they created.

This is what I don't understand..

Your estimate was that LS was 2/3 of LC

R* says LS is bigger than LC, RDR's map, and SA combined

Now unless someone was mistaken and they meant the entire map was bigger than LS, RDR's map, and SA combined, you were wrong.

*LC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still a fail in the multiple cities ddepartment... Its ok to be uncorrect

It's not really a fail since I didn't say they were definitely having multiple cities. I just said it was possible judging from the size of Los Santos that they had shown.

This is what I don't understand..

Your estimate was that LS was 2/3 of LC

R* says LS is bigger than LC, RDR's map, and SA combined

Now unless someone was mistaken and they meant the entire map was bigger than LS, RDR's map, and SA combined, you were wrong.

*LC

The entire map of GTA V is bigger than LC, SA, and RDR - not the city.

Did you really think the city area of Los Santos is the size of all 3 of those maps combined and then there would be countryside around it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you beating a dead horse? No ones fighting anymore, I'm over that little hiccup and I'm sure Pud is too -_-

Dude. We were estimating the size of the city in order to show that the city was too small and therefore miltiple cities had to be in the game. We were wrong. Fail. Ect.

At this point, my estimate still stands. Nothing has been proven wrong about it. There's just a lot of sprawl around it that they didn't show in the first trailer. When they announced the Spring release date, they even added the word "sprawling" to their description of the city.

I knew there had to be more and instead of having another city, they're just spreading Los Santos beyond the hills. I would have preferred a separate city to travel to rather than just one big spread-out city which is what they created.

This is what I don't understand..

Your estimate was that LS was 2/3 of LC

R* says LS is bigger than LC, RDR's map, and SA combined

Now unless someone was mistaken and they meant the entire map was bigger than LS, RDR's map, and SA combined, you were wrong.

*LC

The way i read it, they are talking about the entire map, not just the city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigger than:

San Andreas (13.9mi^2)

RDR (roughly 20mi^2)

GTA IV (roughly 8mi^2)

= roughly 41.9mi^2 with room to spare

Therefore I estimate the map to be roughly 47mi^2 (80km^2), which is absoultely MASSIVE if you think about the level of detail mentioned in the article.

If we use Marcus' estimate and assume 2/3rds will be country and 1/3rd will be LS - we're looking at anywhere between 14-16miĀ² of city space, still double that of LC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an accurate size comparison of VC, SA, and IV. I used the in-game stats to measure a half mile distance on a straight flat course in each game. All measurements were double checked. I'll add V when I get it.

I wish I had Red Dead Redemption.

SOmwe.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew you meant city by your 'accurate' estimations. What gave it away? Your pictures using images of the cities to compare with each other. And you seemed to be pretty sure there would be multiple cities, even though I constantly explained why they would not be.

And if the entire map is bigger than SA+RDR+IV which roughly equals over 40mi^2, why the fuck would the 'sprawling' city they tried to create represent less than 20% of the entire map?

So your prediction if city size is probably still wrong, regardless. It's okay to be wrong by the way, I'm pretty sure everyone has been at one time in their life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's okay to be wrong by the way, I'm pretty sure everyone has been at one time in their life.

And you seemed to be pretty sure there would be multiple cities, even though I constantly explained why they would not be.

JzGZl.jpg

http://www.igta5.com...5917#entry65917

Dg3Vt.gif

If it was 'scaled down to the same size as LS was from LA' it would not qualify as a city at all. It would be a town, and I'm pretty sure there will be small towns/settlements throughout the map, but not 3 large cities like you were so forcefully proposing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R* said that they are only making one large city, and they are making it as big as they can, as close to scale as they can, of course it wont be exact, it will be scaled down.

obviously there will be some small rural towns across the countryside, but thats it.

this map is massive, and arguing about it like 12 year olds, is not gonna make it smaller or bigger. it is what it is. except it.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R* said that they are only making one large city, and they are making it as big as they can, as close to scale as they can, of course it wont be exact, it will be scaled down.

obviously there will be some small rural towns across the countryside, but thats it.

this map is massive, and arguing about it like 12 year olds, is not gonna make it smaller or bigger. it is what it is. except it.

. . . ... Well he sure told you guys

:shifty:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on guys, not this shit again. We now know the map is going to be huge no matter how small the city is. That's the thing that matters right? If the rest of the map is huge, then there must be multiple towns spread out across it. We already know that there is a hick-vill, because that's where Trevor is located in the preview GI got.

@UlanBator - Whatever it is it looks very circular.

I agree.

Why does everyone always argue over semantics ( subtle differences ). It's a joke, because the game will eventually come out and everyone will end up loving it.

So this bullshit arguing over how big the Map will be is just counter-productive and pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its going to be BIGGG..Hopefully... I mean if there is going to be planes it has to be, what would be the point of flying around in a plane over Liberty City if you get to the edge of the map in 10 seconds..Those cities they've been showing us look pretty big hahaX) Especially with the mountains there cant just be a mountain separated from a city with a bridge or something. Since they said the biggest world ever, RDR was huge.Something bigger than that and with modern technology should be fun to explore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judging from the sceenshot of the dam looking down onto Los Santos it looks pretty 'damn' (that was lame) and you cant even see half of LS...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites