Discuss

Attached: 1567652461942.jpg (800x630, 166K)

Realism vs. Fun

>A square

Should the map serve the game or the game serve the map?

you being a kid with potential when right came out vs you being a jaded internet-addicted media slave when left came out

>Implying squares aren't best waifu's

I'm afraid I have to say OLD GOOD and if I'm being perfectly honest NEW BAD.

It's just about spatial illusions, the whole landmass pretty much filled the map screen so that it wouldn't feel so much like a lonely island. For the same reason the V map has hills bordering the shores, so that you're not seeing the ocean when you're driving through there

OLD = SOUL

GTA:SA map is half the size of GTA5 but had twice as much to do.

Attached: IITcAn2.png (500x541, 130K)

San Andreas is the only GTA I have played, but a giant Homer Simpson head for a map sounds kino.

I like V's map but it being an island is fucking retarded. I don't know why Rockstar is so terrified of just closing things off with kill-off points or invisible walls. It's not that big of a deal, guys, it's a game. They even do it in RDR and RDR2.

It's not even a problem with the game having boats and planes because they just put invisible walls in the water, so there's literally no reason design-wise to do this. If the map was surrounded by more area that kept you from going further it would give it a bit more mystery and add to the overall thing.

Also it was gay how half the map isn't even used in story but everyone's complained about that already.

A fucking square.

Vice City = San Andreas > 4 > V > 3 > Vice City Stories = Liberty City Stories > the one where you play as a chink

what to say, pic sums it up

why does the GTA 5 map look like a ninja turtle ?

>I like V's map but it being an island is fucking retarded.

Every 3D GTA map is an island.... all of them.

Attached: vc.png (768x768, 141K)

THIS is soul retard

Attached: 3305183-de-geschiedenis-van-grand-theft-auto-gta-56458-5.jpg (480x359, 22K)

It sucks that there's literally nothing of value outside of Los Santos. All that space is just empty mountains.

kill barriers and invisible walls kill any sense of exploration. why should i try to explore your games world when, at any arbitrary point, i could die or be told that im not allowed to go any farther?

Yeah and I think it's stupid. Especially with IV and V since they've been going with a more realistic angle, it just doesn't make sense.

A square isn't more soulful than a hand crafted, natural looking world, but as far as the contents of the maps go, you're right.

Look at that giant empty beach

if you can afford it, GTAO is unironically superior to GTA SA

The game already does this, it just does it with water.

>I don't know why Rockstar is so terrified of just closing things off with kill-off points or invisible walls. It's not that big of a deal, guys, it's a game
What would happen with planes, would you just start turning around or explode. There would also be quite a lot of landmass since you can see so far away from a plane or from a boat out at sea. It would also need to be reasonably detailed to not look out of place compared to the playable area. And at that point you might as well just make that area playable too, since you already put all that work into it. At that point you just end up back at the start. Works better with something like RDR or Witcher 3 where you're moving on the ground mostly

Attached: DeIw52vVMAAXSUR.jpg (640x480, 41K)

Sain't Row Online: Delivery Simulator

>afford
Don't tell me you spend money on it

>Grand Theft Auto Online
>have to buy cars

Attached: 1566773696336.jpg (700x767, 127K)

All the fucking James Bond shit they added made GTAO fucking retarded and unfun.

Since they're going for realism in modern GTA they could just have it so that if you've flown into a out-of-bounds zone you hear radio chatter telling you that you can't be there and to fuck off before they put you down. They already do this when you go near places like Zancudo.

>Yeah and I think it's stupid.

invisible barriers are what is fucking stupid, kid.

time is also a currency

>Since they're going for realism in modern GTA

How is getting shot down by the air force because you want to fly out over the ocean in any way 'realistic', do you have brain damage?

Reminds me of Talos Principle
>In the beginning were the words and the words made the world. I am the words. The words are everything. Where the words end the world ends. You cannot go forward in the absence of space. Repeat.

That's a beach

perfect to kill whores

I've never had so many load screens in any game ever, and it was slow as shit even on an SSD, fuck GTAO

Just dump them in the water.

Try reading more posts than the one you're replying to you fat headed faggot. The map wouldn't be a stupid island, it would have surrounding area and out-of-bounds zones instead.

Sure, but that would make it a really big out of bounds zone. I think with the draw distance, you'd need something like this to make it seem like the landmass keeps going, with at least some kind of reasonably detailed zone nearer the playable area. Otherwise it would look odd why the population density and level of detail just suddenly drops. I would personally find it a bit annoying if you could see a teaser like that, but can't actually access it

Attached: asdsa.jpg (1000x1000, 415K)

Kill yourself, kid. You're an idiot and your ideas are retarded.

I hate how in old gta games some parts of the map were locked by bridges. Fuck that.

>can't get GTAO cars in SP

for like the first two updates you could, then they decided that people could test drive the cars and stopped doing that

>what? mods? never heard about that

Attached: 1551535325493.png (558x614, 29K)

Objectively wrong. Try to explain your bias again.

Are the stories games really that bad to play? I thought about maybe emulating the PS2 port of Vice City Stories at some point to see what its like, what makes them worse than GTA3 for you?

Christ, every fucking mission in V had you drive across the map and back, listening to the awful characters yap about some stupid shit. They should at least have the sense to keep you in the general area for a while like SA.

I don't think they're bad necessarily, they just don't have the same amount of character as the rest of the GTA games. Kinda feels like a diet GTA or one of the many GTA ripoffs. There were still serviceable and fun though.

I've only played Liberty City Stories, and I mean it wasn't bad, but it was just more of the same. Didn't really have the same atmosphere as GTA 3 though, and it ran worse on PS2

Its also really jarring when you have dialogue like Trevor mentioning other cities or Canada. Is this like the real life US then? Is the united states just a big fucking archipelago then? I think people are just too afraid of invisible walls for no reason, 90% of the players will actually never run into them and this game already does pretty much the same thing by having everything be surrounded by endless water. Just make it like RDR/RDR2 and make planes automatically do an 180 and return to the map if they fly too far away or something

>Is the united states just a big fucking archipelago then?
No, it's still a continent. The water is just there because it's a game. People think about it too much. You also wake up in a hospital after six hours when you get shot to death, isn't that weird too

>fuck you Michael you traitorous fuck
>fuck you Trevor you psycho fuck
>both of you shut the fuck up please
x1000

>Just make it like RDR/RDR2 and make planes automatically do an 180 and return to the map if they fly too far away or something

Or just let the player fly aimlessly around if they want, and they'll inevitably turn back on their own. You're wasting resources to just put up needless barriers because you want to be more controlling about the amount of freedom players have...

OP BTFO

The problem with Gta V's map is that there are barley any buildings you can enter. Red dead which came out a couple years before Gta V, allowed you to enter 80-90% of the buildings. This adds another dimension to gunplay. Running through buildings and taking cover was really fun but it's completely missing from GTA V. Not only that but there's just nothing to find in GTA V. Because you can't enter buildings, there's no secrets, no incentive to explore.

Another factor is the lack of variety. The world is pretty 1 note, aside from Sandy and Paleto. There's no forest area's where you can't see civilization, like San Andreas had. The mountain top is also fairly small and crowded, unlike San Andreas where you can find a log cabin up there and shit is spooky. There's only 1 city. The world is just very arcadey. There's nowhere to get lost, nowhere to adventure. Anywhere you go, you can see a road or civilization.

The last problem is the lack of respect for the past. There's practically almost no references to San Andreas within the world. Remember the locations around grove street? None of it exists. Remember the bridge going over grove street or the highway next to it? No longer there. Remember the skate park next to the hospital? Fuck that. There's nothing trying back the world. CJ's house ain't even there anymore.

TL;DR Gta V suffers from being empty, lacking memorable places from San andreas or verity in locations. Both Gta 4 and Red dead has more buildings that you can go in which makes Gta V less fun for exploration.

>I would personally find it a bit annoying if you could see a teaser like that, but can't actually access it
Imagine if there were entire console generations where this was a common thing in vidya and everyone just accepted it and went about playing the game?

When you think about it all they really did was smash all the cities together and then turn all the empty space into mountains and got credit for a larger map.

There were also console generations where these were considered good visuals

Attached: bubsy-3d-3.jpg (480x360, 21K)

It's not fair to compare GTA 5 to RDR 1 when it's easily the best thing Rockstar has done. RDR 1 is my favourite "story" game, I've spent hundreds of hours in it, if not more.

Smeared sprites are peak soulessness

Attached: 6AFC8DCE-2C09-45F8-8CDB-CEA6D219FF62.jpg (1280x720, 205K)

It got worse in GTA Online when you'd have to drive for like 5 minutes just to get to your first objective, why the fuck didn't they just spawn you at mission starts?

Just like every state in this country

Attached: cbfa6663ad252f3eb9b3a78feca96a0a.jpg (1500x971, 204K)

I recognized which series this is about because of the right map.

San Andreas's map felt big because it was so diverse, and had so many memorable locations.
GTA V's map is more "realistic", which makes less locations stand out in your mind. It may be bigger, but far less of it is memorable, so SA's map feels bigger when you remember it.

>The country that was built on a grid system has a lot of square states

As we know, the left coast is the best coast

>left coast is the best coast
If you're a taconigger

Bubsy 3D was considered ugly even back than retard.

>Every GTA game is on an island

There's nothing fun to do unless you've got friends with specific fanmade gametypes

GTA;O is nearly unplayable unless you play with freinds in a private public session.

>304-227

It felt big because the draw distance was about 200 feet

And GTA V's is what? 250 feet?

Attached: gta-v-ps4-build-comparison-screenshot-2.jpg (1280x720, 185K)

I'm not sure what you even mean. Those hills in the back are like two miles away. If you're high up enough, you can see the whole map from one end to the other

Am I the only one who likes fog/haze for draw distance? I've seen people use visual mods for gta v and they often look worse because they remove the fog and you can clearly see across the world.

Also, I'm not sure if these mod makers realize this, but in real life, the further away something is, the more blue it gets. Gta V does this but the mods remove it, as if it's a mistake or something. RDR2 does this too but to a more realistic extent. It only really happens to REALLY far away things, but in Gta V the distance is a lot shorter because the world and scale are a lot smaller. Either way, the modders end up removing something that makes the game better because they need to see across the world for some reason.

And they're gray. When you compare it to san andreas its not that much better.

Attached: gta-san-andreas-screenshot_1920.0.0.jpg (1200x800, 165K)

Sneed

>Am I the only one who likes fog/haze for draw distance?
It just means you're a retarded consolenigger

After a certain point you just can't see further. Looking in that direction, Chiliad should be visible in the background, but it's not

Not on PC.

aight but what's your thoughts on the blue haze that happens to things in the distance in real life being removed from games because people think it's the same as fog?

San Andreas starts looking pretty silly when you increase the draw distance

Attached: 1470350730_1470349107_1.jpg (800x450, 53K)

So if there was a blue-gray lump in the background it would be equal to GTA V?

Well, yes. If you could see as far away, it would be equal. That's generally how it works

Attached: 13939990_1761682600776964_955948914_o.jpg (1600x900, 250K)

Yup. That's what I'm saying. The same thing goes for Gta V, it looks stupid when you can see across the world, especially when they remove the blue hazing on distance objects that is a thing that happens in real life.

singleplayer already had a James Bond car

Which GTAish sandbox game has by far the biggest map in gaming history.

You can see across the map in vanilla, but yeah things do get obscured a bit. For instance here is someone standing on Chiliad and you can see downtown LS

Attached: gta-5-mount-chiliad_2778397.jpg (1920x1080, 412K)

There is an invisable barrier around the map in GTA V. If you fly far enough over the ocean with a plane you'll hit it and explode. With a boat it just turns you around. Same thing with the height limit for a plane you can reach it in jets then you begin to descend.

Probably Just Cause, don't know which one

People think it's fog because atmospheric perspective usually doesn't happen unless you're on a mountain.

You're retarded

This is fine. It's not clear, which is the problem I've seen with mods. With Mods I've seen the haze completely removed so there's no color difference from the mountain you're on and the one across the world.

The problem isn't really the distance it's the removal of the coloration of things in the distance. That makes everything look bad and fake.

This guy

Attached: 9125.png (750x650, 130K)

>every state
Literally just the trash ones west of the Mississippi.

>hop in your car and drive out of town toward the next city
>hop in your car and drive out of town, loop around, and return to the same fucking city

hazing happens regardless of where you're at though. Literally look at a far away building in real life from a street and it'll be a little more blue and faded. Whenever I go to the lake in real life, I past a couple of mountains and they are clearly bluer than anything around me. It's just something that happens and a lot of painters tend to use this technique in painting to show distance.

Smog is not the same as natural atmospheric perspective.
>in real life, I past a couple of mountains and they are clearly bluer
like I just fucking said, it only happens with mountains. Covering everything in performance fog is not realistic.

You're arguing about maps used for different console generations with vastly different stories. Could a PS2 handle GTA V's map? Does the map fit the story? GTA V is a whole state compared to the story that centered around 3 island landscapes with a gang member CJ. GTA 5 being a look at the very recent past and including recent events with DLC. The maps are formed for the story as well as for the capability of consoles at the time. The stories of both games are intricate and beautiful. They are different. Both maps are created for the stories. As for driving distance in GTA 5 you can floor it in a super car. Even Trevor's truck is fast if you modify it with the hundred thousand dollars he starts with. Both games are great. Both maps are beautiful. I prefer GTA 5 being a member of the avid roleplay community it contains that would not be possible in GTASA.

>new thing bad x old thing good

>It only happens with mountains
Except it doesn't. It happens with with literally everything, buildings included. The thing is Gta V's scale for distance isn't realistic so it happens to things when it should be for really far away things.

is there a mod to eliminate draw distance fog from SA on pc? If so I'd play the shit out of that again.

Washington and Oregon, you guys alright up there?

OLD GOOD NEW BAD

empty desert vs a full interactive map
I choose GTA SA

2 miles is about where you start seeing considerable loss of detail at the "haziest". Which means even at sunset you should be able to see most of the city in detail.

But you can't even see across the street in GTA V

Attached: cdff26-screenshot 1.jpg (1280x1024, 346K)

Are you playing on the lowest settings?

>can't even see to the bottom of the building

Attached: GTA-V-GTA-5-Screenshots-Pillbox-Hill-Great-View-From-The-Top-Of-A-Building.jpg (640x360, 74K)

For reference, here's how real life looks

Attached: Attaching-the-Pro-to-jib.png (800x451, 631K)

Thats the joke behind the soul vs soulless meme

Except it works because games haven't improved in a decade

see

Vice City Stories shits on VC.

Imagine thinking fortnite is on par with anything from the last decade

fuck off nigger, Chinatown Wars was great, the drug-dealing minigame alone was more fun than doing any other shitty side activity in Vice City

it should be a balance of both. but this is Yea Forums so the answer is yes.

Huh, it does look like Homer. I never noticed that.

That's what outs hims as a zoomer, he doesn't understand that a lot of the most popular games right now are ripped off Minecraft mods.

Soul

Attached: sofaq01gpyy11.jpg (1474x2048, 402K)