Why does GTA:SA's map still feel so much bigger?

Variety and fog

>>18032
Because it had actual things in the areas, and each area had personality that made them distinct from one another

harder to get around. Kind of like why morrowind feels big even though it's half a square inch

>>18032
Variety, shorter LOS and mountains

>>18032
>we will never get the awesome Driving School/Flight School again

Having three major cities helped, instead of one giant city that you never leave.

>>18033
Even without the fog, GTA:SA's map is designed so you can't see the entire thing at once unless you're flying

>>18032
GTAV has too many mountains filling the map

In GTA V there aren't any places where you can feel like you're in the middle of nowhere

>>18032
they only used like 20% of the V map whereas san andreas used 100%

>>18032
because half of GTA V's map is filled with nothing

File: los santos overview.jpg (186KB, 1228x722px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1228x722px

>home

>>18032
I dunno but it's strange. Fucking Fallout New Vegas' map feels bigger than V's and that's a tiny ass map.

COME AND JOIN THE PARTY

File: 1454767053283.jpg (87KB, 409x409px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 409x409px

>>18044
>los santos overview
>it's mostly flint county

>>18044
Instead of removing the fog they should remove all LOD within the draw distance

>>18032
Left map should be an example of bad map design, and it would have been back then before "realism" retards that think just because something lacking exists on real life it should get a free pass on videogames.

>>18032
Because you were 9 when you played it

>>18043
So is SAs

>>18032
Are those two maps scaled properly? looking at the city blocks, SA looks smaller than V

>>18050
i was acutally 6 when it came out but that doesnt mater

>>18051
Fuck off autista.

>>18044
Why don't they just release old games with normal models for all lods, reduced fog and widescreen fix?

File: 1491051292920.jpg (20KB, 243x182px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 243x182px

And yet, I can't go back to SA after playing V

>>18032

GTA V
>1 city
>2 towns
>1 highway in a circle around the map

GTA SA
>3 cities
>12 towns
>highway network that goes all around the state

>tfw still playing SA:MP
>crash n burn server has returned some months ago

>>18032
>still
Does it really feel that big to you now or are you just going by old memories?

The issue with the map in GTA V is that everything loops back to LS. There's nothing else important or significant out there to make you feel like it's an actual world, they needed another city to hammer home that feeling of driving/traveling from one place to another. I remember how cool it felt in SA to be able to drive to another city, in V no matter where you go you end up looping back into LS, it doesn't give you the feeling of travelling to some other place and at least for me that kills the subjective impression of distance. The map needed another destination, like another city should've extended the map further to the north. Other than that I actually appreciated having large empty areas, that also helps with scale and fucking around in the pretty sizable mountains was enjoyable for a while.

>>18032
Why did they focus solely on Los Angeles in V? It was the least interesting part of San Andreas.

>>18056
I could never enjoy V and it's shitty multiplayer after playing the greatness that SA and the multiplayer mods were. To this day i would have SAMP any day over GTA:O

>>18052
It's scaled to the in-game units, which is 1 unit = 1 meter.

>>18061
it's fun with friends

>>18059
This

Especially if you're mainly following the story, when you leave Los Santos you spend a long ass time in the small towns and two big cities before you finally head back, and it feels like you've been ages away

>>18042
This. V's is way bigger, but you interact a lot less with it. Most of the map is just places that you drive through that are unmemorable. There's more stuff, but you don't live in it like you do in SA

>>18054
Great argument, shitlord

>>18063
SAMP's more fun with friends.
GTAO is a fucking crashgrab.

>>18045
New vegas doesn't have cars, most of gta v's map is empty space anyway, while new vegas has lots of locations all around the map.

>>18066
>Anon Has Been Infected With Syphilis, Gonorrhea, And Mad Cow Disease.

File: member.jpg (94KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 800x600px

>>18034
This. I remember liking San Fierro's hills and bridges, the strip and suburbs in Las Venturas, and the ghettos in Los Santos. And of course there was a lot of stuff in between: the Native American ruins near the dam, the dam itself, the various little towns (especially the one just north of San Fierro - it's a shame there weren't any houses there) and the deeper forests (whereas GTA V's San Andreas just has drylands and mostly inaccessible hills).

It would be great (not just for us but for R*) if they just added San Fierro to Online at least and gave it more wooded, accessible countryside.

>>18066
not as fun as getting together with your bros and passing the controller around

>>18032
V's map would be ok if the main city wasn't so shit.

>>18032
Because San Andreas:
> uses it's space more efficiently.
>Indirect Roads
>3 Very Diverse Cities with 11 Small Towns
>Fog
>Vehicles are slightly slower in San Andreas.

>>18065
stay triggered cucklord. You don't know how good map/level design works, i do that for a hobby.

>>18070
not as fun as jerking off your bro

>>18064
On top of the story showing just how much as changed since you have been gone. Even more so if you took the time to do the gang warfare stuff and seeing all your territory lost.

Its all pace and space. You spend the first part of the game in that city where you never get to see the actual size of it because of elevation/buildings obstructing your view the whole time. Then your dropped out into the woods with nothing to get in your way and it feels like everything opened up on you.

Then he mission when you arrive in Fierro is you mostly in that slow ass van so the travel to the city and the arrival is alot longer then it would feel if you were in a banshee or something.

>>18074
not as fun as a good old round of soggy biscuits

>>18032
The disneyland effect

>>18037
V has flight school though.

File: 1483092329460.jpg (23KB, 325x325px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 325x325px

>>18074
bros are not for sexual

Because in V Los Santos is large but very same-y and there's not much content there so there's no reason to explore it.

And the rest of the map is one highway that loops around the island pointlessly and a bit of desert with nothing in it.

>>18080
when my skinny ass puts on a wig and dresses up as rikku and give one of my bros a blowjob I'm no longer a bro so it's all good

>>18080
Having a platonic JO sesh isn't sexual.

What they could do, if they really plan on milking Online for a long time, is make San Fierro DLC. Just add a new continent in the north with more normal forests (and less inaccessible dried up rocky ridges), and at the other end of that continent there's a small town that leads into the Golden Gate bridge that leads into San Fierro (which is L/U shaped so that there's an actual bay). That would make planes useful, driving meaningful, areas without towns nicer, farm/ranch player homes an option, and boats/yachts more useful/interesting.

Unfortunately, they're just going to suck GTA Online for what money there's left and move on to whatever's next for them, probably pulling the same online jewery on Red Dead Redemption 2.

>>18032
>alamo sea

Do they really label it as a sea? It's a lake at best desu

File: hmm.jpg (38KB, 399x477px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 399x477px

>>18085
of course not

>>18087
it's based on the Salton Sea, which is a lake

>>18075

One of the reasons I disliked how the game unfolds in V is due to the fact that the entire map is open right away.

For me the GTA experience was always getting to explore and know the map one area at a time. Sure, the areas were always separated by some contrived bridge collapse or whatnot but you had something to look forward to.

And with new areas came new factions to deal with, new cars to find, new weapons and so on. The sense of progress was there throughout the game.

IV also dropped the ball on that one a bit because the Jersey part of Liberty City was kinda shit and nothing of any importance was there (true to life).

But in V, with the constant switching of characters and the entire map being open it always feels like you can do anything at any point, but one you romp through the map the first time there's no reason to revisit anything.

In that regard I think III was most successful.
First area was slummy, second was the big city and the third was mostly focused on rich houses (with expensive cars) with some projects and airport thrown in.

>>18090
>Jersey part of Liberty City
technically it wasn't Liberty City

>>18064
>Especially if you're mainly following the story
Yeah, that's exactly it. You were actually going places, traveling back to another city after you fucked around somewhere else for a good while actually felt like a journey despite how tiny the map actually is. In V it's always like you run off to do some errand and then quickly head back home. Actually, that's exactly what you're doing. Now that I think of it, in the SP the 3 protagonist system also hurts the impression of scale, you basically teleport around the place and kill any impression of size. What the did in V is kill the illusion of distance, despite the map actually having way, way more scale.

>>18044

I fucking swear SA had better graphics than that when I played it

File: p2dfx_gtasaa.jpg (349KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 1920x1080px

>>18093
It can look alright with mods

File: 1381096110474.jpg (104KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1280x1024px

>>18044

>[yeyo music starts]

>>18095
That's a neighborhood in The Sims 3

Does anyone remember hot coffee?

Back when it was the right who advocated censoring video games rather than the left.

>>18097
funny how that was such a big deal but now the new Mass Effect has actual nudity in its sex scenes and no one cares

Who Crazybob's CnR here?

>>18093
Well in that image, most of the object are at minimum LoD and there's no fog or heat haze effects to blurr out the LoD effect.

File: sa-mp-067.png (3MB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1200px

who /heavyrp/ here

>>18099
I'm a rapist

>>18097
I was the only one of my friends who managed to get a copy before it got "banned". It was pretty cool.

What a dumb controversy that was anyway, it would be as though people tried to get Skyrim banned because you can mod sex into it that isn't normally available in any way

File: DudeSweet.gif (1MB, 250x160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 250x160px

>tfw you were neck deep in playing GTAIII and you buy your local vidya magazine and see that Vice City is coming out
>tfw you were neck deep in playing Vice City and you buy your local vidya magazine and see that San Andreas is coming out

>>18083
holy fucking nostalgia

For anyone in here, play San Andreas again. It feels so goddamn small, now. It's all just nostalgia.

>>18087
A sea can be inland, it just needs to be salty.

>>18101
I sort of am, I just role play as an anarcho capitalist, and kill anyone who violates the NAP.

>>18106
the variety makes it good

>>18102
I'm a pig. And i take no bribes.

File: carchase.gif (3MB, 230x140px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 230x140px

>>18106

>tfw in 15 years GTAVIII will be out and V will feel pathetically primitive

>>18032
Quality/variety over size.

The maps in IV and V are so large and boring that i don't even know where i am half of the time

File: 1490856703965.png (304KB, 942x960px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 942x960px

>We're going BACK to san andreas!
>Map is completely different and in no way san andreas
>Only reason it is san andreas is because they fucking said so and i guess because of los santos and chilliad
>No san fierro or venturas, which are a staple in everyoness mind when they think of san andreas
If the map had no name you wouldn't hink 'this is san andreas, we're in san andreas' you'd assume it's some brand new place but because they said its san andreas, it is now san andreas. shit sucks

File: rr.jpg (178KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1280x720px

>>18106
it only feels small if you mod the draw distance, the way the map is built still makes it feel big

>>18106
It doesn't feel small at all. It may look small, but when playing everything fails so greatly distributed its ridiculous, devs would never would be able to make something like that again, having so many resources has spoiled them and made them lazy. GTA SA was an example of good map design and space usage.

>>18106
Even then, it still is a great fucking game.

>>18113

Nigga pls.

In both SA and V it was obvious you're driving around LA.

I'm pissed they just made one city too but whatever.

>>18044
Is this a PS1 build?

>>18106
I played through it again recently and it still feels big

>>18118
When's the last time you played a PS1 game?

I'LL HAVE A

File: jason voorhes.jpg (80KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 800x600px

who /spent hours looking for monsters/ here?

>>18118
It's a mod that disables all view distance related shit but also makes the weather look like shit.

>>18106
I used to play it every day and it's pretty big.

File: 1404603187541.png (121KB, 250x418px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 250x418px

>>18095
>somehow i put dozens of hours into this when i was a kid

how? that map is unbelievably small

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SLHkzN4FZ0

I still cri evritime

>>18122

my buddy and i always tried to find leatherface since we heard rumors of him being in the woods

>>18122
>youtube search mysteries of san andreas
>click
>ms paint opening
>X files theme begins to play

>>18106
Playing through it right now and it feels way bigger than V.

>>18095
>>18125
Well you obviously didn't because that is a sims 3 neighborhood, dumbass.

It being in a completely different art style didn't tip you off?

>>18128
>jumpscare near the end of the video
fucking hell

>>18125
It's not the real map but parts of the map are gated behind long quest lines and if you at the roads, you will see that the devs used them greatly to add to the experience of size. Sometimes if you wanted to go from point A to B by car, you had to make a long loop which made the map feel bigger.
Cars also aren't really that fast but they made them feel fast so it took a while to travel.

If you really ever ask this question again remember that it all comes down to movement speed.

GTAV characters and vehicles move fast enough for everything to feel tiny. In the past the movement speed of vehicles and characters were just slow enough that the illusion of size was never broken. GTAV, even with vanilla, let things move fast enough that you can go from one end to the other end of the entire map between 5 and 10 minutes.

>>18122
You know the race that passes through the Panopticon heading from the east? During that race, you drive into the Panopticon area, and heading the other way over a dirt road that doesn't normally have traffic is a pickup truck. Only time you ever see something driving over that particular road.

Someone took the effort to script it in outside of normal traffic routines.

>>18032
Because you have nostalgia goggles.

>>18134
Oh, found a video that shows it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_qN256qBHE
Start at around 2:35.

>>18032
variety is the keypart makes shit feel bigger even when its not.

>there's a whole wiki on "SA myths"
>most of it is bullshit

>>18032
Because V has you exploring the map very fast, but SA has you gradually expand out from Grove Street. Home.

>>18045
It's all the tedious trekking through the desert with your spurs that jingle, jangle, jingle...
jingle, jangle!

>>18055
You could just mod that yourself.

File: 1451549834200.jpg (38KB, 473x357px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 473x357px

>>18095
>tfw learning this map is based off of an actual section of Miami.

>>18045
New Vegas' maps is dotted quest hubs, which makes regional pockets and their environs feel busy and populated. It's actually very well done.

>>18080
It's just a brojob

I feel like you guys hate on GTA V's map way too much. Sure, it could have some more interesting roads around the north east. But it actually does have a lot of interesting areas.

>city
>hills north of the city with lots of windy roads
>desert for high-speed offroading
>circular highway for chases
>forest and town up north for smaller chases and gunfights
>various bases and military areas
>farms south of chiliad

I think it's pretty good. The mountains in the east are lame though.

>>18146
You forgot the dam. It's pretty cool.

>>18102
fuck you

>>18148
no, I fuck you

>>18044
>at least it was before I fucked everything up

>>18069
>It would be great (not just for us but for R*) if they just added San Fierro to Online at least
Well rumor is that they were planning that for an expansion, similar to how GTA IV had the episodes from Liberty City.

>>18136

>2:19 to 2:31

That farm area was awesome for bike stunting. I miss it ;_;

>>18057

One of the reasons San Andreas is still the king.

Nostalgia is a mental illness.

GTAV's map was excellent.

>>18147
Oh year, that whole reservoir area. And the wind farm.

File: eyJ1cmwiOiJodHRwOi8vaS5pbWd1ci5jb20veWs1dWRHVy5wbmcifQ.png (756KB, 658x488px) Image search: [Google]

756KB, 658x488px

San Andreas is still the best GTA to date, desu.

The next GTA game should be in San Fierro in the 60s

>>18156
HONK

>>18032
More shit condensed into a smaller area or even the same amount of shit condensed into a smaller area.

>>18032
Kind of like Just Cause maps, it's mostly empty terrain and generic copy-pasted scenery. The whole of SA's map was detailed instead of just LS as in GTA V.

What's better: SAMP or MTA?

>>18161
MTA is better in a technical sense but I think SAMP has more servers

>>18079
Isn't that online only?

File: wjpg 1066×_w.jpg (375KB, 1066x1600px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 1066x1600px

>>18143
>mfw grew up on Collins Avenue and saw that one building in VC looked suspiciously like my irl apartment building

Can you run SAMP with a pirated copy of SA?

>>18165
Pirated how? You HAVE to have a no-cd exe for SAMP to work.

>>18163
no

>>18164
>not breaking into the apartment to see the hidden easter egg of an npc dressed like you playing a copy of GTA VC on the TV screen.

>>18032
BECAUSE THE CAR TOP SPEED IN SAN ANDREAS IS LIKE HALF OF V'S AND THE ROADS SUCK ASS

>>18166
just downloaded

>>18161
Both are good
Samp is better for freeroaming/stunt stuff and MTA is better for mods and combat stuff

>>18096
>>18130
No it's not faggots

>>18165
of course it does

>>18172
http://www.freshprincecreations.com/ts3vicecity.htm

>>18068
crazybob's was the shit

>>18164
Did you ever try and blow up your window to end your pathetic life before you came here?

>>18099
I used to play that shit every single day when I was a kid. I'd guard the prison cells. Good times

>>18032
Nostalgia.
It really, really doesn't feel bigger.

>>18086
It pains me to think that the fun sandbox online mode of RDR will be stained with the shitty GTA:O tactics.

And instead of potentially getting an amazing DLC campaign, we'll only get micro transactions up the ass for the online mode.

>>18032

The map was more dense with way more to do and spread across three distinctly different cities.

I've never really compared the two but San Andreas just feels packed to the brim with content.

GTA V was meaty sure but it just somehow didn't feel as fleshed out as San Andreas did especially with side content.