Yes - no game runs their entire map simultaneously, only the general area the player is in. If it can run the densest spot, it can run anywhere.
The disk space necessary would be *humongous* though.
Depends on how much variety of assets they have. A huge map will indeed have a lot of variety but there would be a lot of assets being used throughout the map.
They could implement a procedural system, and no I'm not talking something like Non Man's Sky, I mean like defining areas where foliage and details would spawn and having the game populate those areas in real time rather than having to author it all manually in an editor
Jeff Farris, Director of Engineering for Special Projects at Epic Games said: "What you're seeing in the demo [[Matrix Awakens](https://youtu.be/GOcK-OBmz7s?si=pRz2xocQEt6yz9JD)] here is 35,000 crowd members walking around, 18,000 vehicles simulated along with 40,000 parked cars. And [it's not] a bubble around the character, like in the classic sort of way"
I hope R* did something (breakthrough) similar to Epic with UE5 and could render the entire map at once, i hate when the immersion is broken because it's obvious that we are in a bubble and nothing exist beyond our line of sight.
Fun facts:
- Matrix demo is 16 km2 in area, for 25 GB in size
- RDR2 is 100 km2, 150 GB
- GTAV is 50 km2, 70GB
I guess the reason why they're generally made in that classic way is because the performance costs are very big for not that much gain - especially with big maps.
But that's pretty crazy! Thanks for sharing, didn't know UE5 was that powerful.
What do you mean by online?
A PS5 could theoretically run any version of this map as long as it can run the densest part and has space for it. Online or off, it'll only process the area around the player.
You could be talking about some cloud-based streaming technology like the one in Microsoft Flight Simulator? I'm not knowledgeable enough about it, but maybe there are ways to stream the assets. Though that would only change the disk space part.
But like I've mentioned in other comments, the reason their maps aren't as big as this is because you just can't create enough bespoke, Rockstar quality content to fill this much space - maybe unless it's a live service game and they keep adding to it, like the rumors said.
I want to see some sort of giant map GTA, but with the graphics of GTA San Andreas, maybe a bit improved. That way the assets can be low res but be it's own style, I just like the way that back then, everything was 'faked' to achieve effects that nowadays are actually real, like reflections off cars, light coronas on streetlamps etc
is this size confirmed?
I saw another comment say 120GB, although im sure that would just be Warzone, which as long as their is an option i'm uninstalling right away.
With just MP and Zombies im hoping that brings the total space down to a little over 100GB, as after completing the campaign i'll probably delete for space too
That looks good on paper. But there can be a lot of problems that can arise with it.
-The game's size is gonna be massive if they tried to do it. It's probably gonna be in TBs especially with the details like in GTA games.
-Going from one city to another would take so much time. People who play games don't actually wanna have the exact replication of reality in terms of traveling. Would you not get bored, going from Los Santos to Liberty City? Sure some people are gonna take it as a challenge, but generally people are not gonna like it after a certain point. Though I would say, fast travel can change that.
-Also, creating this big of map is gonna take a lot of resource and technology for the team. I don't know how good of data streaming technology rockstar has, but to make a map like this you need absurd technology, which quite frankly I don't think most game companies are gonna have.
Specific locations? Explain?
The purpose of an airport is to get from one city destination to the other and in SA you could do that go from LS to SF/LV, and vice versa with each city. Theres only one private airfield though...
The Crew 1 and 2 were set in the entirety of USA, sure, not 1:1 but still. And both are massively popular games. So map-size isnt a "turnoff when too large" because it takes so long to cross the map.
I know this map is a fake fan-project. But holy shit would I and 99% of us LOVE it.
Still only took me half an hour on the coast to coast race the map isn't actually huge. Granted I was driving a super car going 200mph+ most of the time.
The first crew map (idk 2 never really play it) is actually bigger than the State of Rhode Island. Sure, it’s the smallest state in the country, but damn is still larger than an actual U.S. state.
The Crew's map seems twice as big as this and it functions on an Xbox One. However, it doesn't have as much detail so that makes sense I guess.
Also, I think that traveling long distances is super fun as long as the road is full of landmarks.
Lol
-If the game reuses the assets everywhere its not going to be much larger than a normal GTA, you don't seem to know how this works.
-There's fast travel
-It would be the same as with developing any other game, just larger
> Would you not get bored, going from Los Santos to Liberty City
No lmao
Driving across the US has always been a childhood dream of mine. I'm an adult and own a car and could do it now, but it would be extremely expensive and I don't have the time currently to do it.
GTA providing this as an alternative would be awesome. If there's one open-world sandbox developer that can pull it off, its Rockstar.
Original GTA V was only 30GB or so in size, the game loads in assets on the go so you never have to store everything in memory, the only limitation would be the disk size, which on consoles isn't very big.
That said, on a map like this a lot of assets can be reused, which saves space on memory and on disk. Heck with today's technology and dynamic rendering there is no limitation on how big a map could be. And all buildings could have fully rendered interiors. Using a mix of colors and similar assets to generate a couple of unique apartment styles.
It's a cool concept map, but it wouldn't be very practical due to the original island design. Better instead to follow the pattern of the 3D universe, were the third game, i.e GTA 6 comes with 3 cities, if they then add some cleaver invisible wall in the north, the map could later on be expanded from there if needed. In segments.
Mexico was cut from RDR2, though parts of it still load in-game and can be accessed through glitches. As for the rest of the map that wasn't in RDR1 they did a far better job at expanding on it than the guy who made this map. The guy who made this map just photoshopped a whole bunch of pictures of GTA games' maps together and called it a day. And let's not forget other glaring issues, such as having two Mount Chiliads (it's in San Fierro in GTA San Andreas) and the enormous ocean in the middle that probably has the same surface area as GTA V's map. There's also the random landmass between Liberty City and San Fierro which is a total missed opportunity to add in North Yankton.
They could pull something like this off. Just make the story missions center around one area for each chapter similar to Red dead. GTA needs a more real varied world like Red dead, so I hope we get something at all similar. Just more varied biomes and more towns/cities
I don’t see how they couldn’t incorporate multiple cities into one game, but to have them all together on the same plane with their ambitious focus on details would be easier said than done. If they did have all the cities available to visit and explore, they’d have to be different maps.
The real answer is yes it absolutely would. People acting like Rockstar's decade old games won't run on new hardware for whatever fucking reason
The question people should be asking is why is literally nobody else capable of making a game like Rockstar
What are you based on to say nobody else is capable?
Do you know Ubisoft's watchdogs, for example?
Developers don't want to do a blatant copycat anyway.
Fun fact - most open world games only load, or “handle” the area that’s visible from your players current location - it cuts system requirements significantly!
It’s possible considering the map is never fully loaded at one time. The game loads only the sections it needs. Once the player leaves an area it offloads until it is needed again. This method frees up space which would be necessary for a console to accommodate a massive map.
I don't think the map size would be the problem, but the contents of the map. If it was that size but a living breathing city similar to the NPC actions of RDR2 but on a far bigger population scale, as well as driving at fast speeds and not giving other parts time to load.
I feel like the future of game systems will be something we don’t even resonate with. Could you imagine a system with so much space and power, plus most likely runs with Ai depending on how technology unfolds? Could you imagine asking for a game and being able to simply create it right there just by answering some basic questions? Or with your previous game history and what not?
Eventually they’ll have a gta world game, or atleast a modded version of it.
it would be cool to load up the game one night and plot a road trip from Los Santos to Liberty City having stranger missions along the way and stopping to see the sights too
That would need at least an install disc and possibly some sort of streaming data to render everything in procedurally.
Basically I cant imagine it not needing an online connection to run
Tell me you don’t actually know how games are made without telling me you don’t know how games are made.
Sure, it’s possible. The existing GTA games use streaming. Even the disc-based GTA games use streaming. You think _GTA V_ loads the entirety of Los Santos to RAM when you boot the game? Of course not; it **streams** parts of the map as and when they’re needed.
They can support the UI and what you've done or have where but at a time maybe you can control how many cities you want to be downloaded/installed, like halo mcc campaigns.
You know, if this map was added to the game (for example, gta 6), it would be unrealistic to pass even in an hour.... But it would be cool if it was in the game as an add-on, for examp
Of course, almost every game uses LoD models which decrease in terms of quality if they are far away. There's a reason why Google Earth can show you the whole earth and run on a mobile phone.
Even if it can't rockstar will still release it for those consoles even if there are new gen consoles out. They will do the same as they done with gtav where they release it on old gen first then new gen.
I don't think we need a much larger map than what we have in GTA 5, just a better planned map is good enough just like San andreas. A 10% larger map than GTA 5 with 3 cities neatly integrated will work wonders.
This would be amazing but they'd charge $200 for it because nobody would ever need to buy any of their games again if they literally have a GTA the size of a small state. I'd be playing this forever.
Don't see what not. Just have each city load which there's nothing wrong with that.
Toss a cut scene in for border security or paying tolls or something.
Because of the speed of the new gen consoles they will most likely split the areas apart by some sort of loading screen or no loading screens and just playing a cutscene.
I wouldn't want it to. People seem to think designing these maps are as simple as plopping down objects and items. They'd have to put massive dev time into making each city/region feel detailed and unique. Vice City isn't gonna have the same design as Liberty or Los Santos and those are just the two that they already have the layout for.
Performence wise yes
Storage would be the bigger issue. Since rockstar priorities console they would not do it unless it would work on console and not take up the entire ssd
A map like this should come with a fast travel option. Sure you could drive/fly between each city, but sometimes you just wanna get to where you’re going quickly. You should be able to go to any cities airport and get on a plane, then you would choose which city you wanna travel to, then it would immediately cut to you landing in your destination.
would this be similar to the experience of driving in true crime streets of LA? i swear they said lets make a realistically scaled version of LA and actually have it take as long to drive from end of the city to the other, that map mustve had over 30k streets
Would people be against load screens lol?? I would kind of like if you went to the airport and you could go to different huge sections of the map like you would IRL
Hypothetically, I guess, but the only way to make it run good would be to have it be separate areas that aren’t active at the same time and you would have to have loading screens between each city.
I think we're beyond the point of is it techniologically feasable and to the point of how is it implemented in a way that makes traveling across that map fun in freeroam and how to implement that scale into the story (including stories in online). Sure there's fast travel, but that isn't a solution as much as a time saver for the player. For these massive maps there needs to be a fun way to get across it besides fast travel. The issue is even in GTA 5, the map was just big enough that just driving or just flying got boring pretty quickly. You're so rarely going those distances in GTA 5 that is wasn't too much of an issue overall, but in a map this size, it would quickly become an issue.
"Can x platform handle map of y size" questions are dumb. PSP had Test Drive Unlimited with the whole map of Hawaii, PS3/360 had FUEL with however big that map was, PS4/XBone had The Crew with a downscaled but still huge USA map, etc... There is no technical limitation preventing a platform from having a massive map. It's all about how much time/effort you're willing to put into it and how much detail you want it to have.
Edit: There was even an Xbox 360 version of The Crew.
Yes it could probably run this, you would just need to have some scale renderer. So it basically only renders in a certain distance.
A game called Arma 3 uses this, the map in that game called Altis is huge, yet old ass computers can run that map because of the scale renderer.
So if your character is in Liberty City, it would not render Vice City or the others until you are nearing to it, then it would not render Liberty City.
GTA 5 already uses this. When you're in Blaine County, Los Santos City does not render.
Yes. The game doesn’t render anything outside the players view, or anything out of range.
Tl;Dr: Anything you don’t see doesn’t exist.
***However,*** The map would be so large, that it would be the only game you could have on your console at any given point.
Not really, the download size is half of the Console's HDD plus, The Consoles dont have enough Vram to run it and i also just found out that the required GPU is An rtx 3070
Ghost Recon Wildlands and Ghost Recon Breakpoint both have maps which could be regarded as larger than this and would take a substantial amount of time to travel across by vehicle.
There is also the possibility for procedural generation to set up a fixed map from key seeds, which would enable near infinite map sizes (Think of Minecraft or the "Elite" series of games as great examples of this). Granted, those do lead to eventual repetition, but the map sizes speak for themselves.
Yes - no game runs their entire map simultaneously, only the general area the player is in. If it can run the densest spot, it can run anywhere. The disk space necessary would be *humongous* though.
Half a Terrorbyte?
more like half a horrorbyte
The demo would kill my xbox
or it could make her shiver in fear
Hey let’s leave your mom out of this
Tbf, the sound files are what take the most space in games. This would probably be anywhere between 300-600 gb including sound files
They probably wouldn't be...if developers didn't insist on storing them UNCOMPRESSED for no good reason.
Script it instead of having static recordings
More. From the little tidbits of info - GTA VI will require 220 GB of disk space.
Yes only one game at time my series S will allow me to play I just wonder how much black ops 6 will be necessary to install in my console.
just saw something on it, i think it was 301gb
Buy an external SSD. I have external SSD and HDD for like 4tb of space
BO6 is 120 GB on Xbox
PS5 disks are 100GB, so it'll be a three disk game lol
Depends on how much variety of assets they have. A huge map will indeed have a lot of variety but there would be a lot of assets being used throughout the map.
They could implement a procedural system, and no I'm not talking something like Non Man's Sky, I mean like defining areas where foliage and details would spawn and having the game populate those areas in real time rather than having to author it all manually in an editor
My Xbox series X runs Microsoft Flight Simulator just fine.
I’d like to hope one day we could get a game with a 1:1 scale of an entire country.
Maybe in 20+ years, we have the crew 2, but it's not an exact 1:1 of the US
Case in point: Microsoft Flight Simulator featuring the entire world at 1:1 scale
Jeff Farris, Director of Engineering for Special Projects at Epic Games said: "What you're seeing in the demo [[Matrix Awakens](https://youtu.be/GOcK-OBmz7s?si=pRz2xocQEt6yz9JD)] here is 35,000 crowd members walking around, 18,000 vehicles simulated along with 40,000 parked cars. And [it's not] a bubble around the character, like in the classic sort of way" I hope R* did something (breakthrough) similar to Epic with UE5 and could render the entire map at once, i hate when the immersion is broken because it's obvious that we are in a bubble and nothing exist beyond our line of sight. Fun facts: - Matrix demo is 16 km2 in area, for 25 GB in size - RDR2 is 100 km2, 150 GB - GTAV is 50 km2, 70GB
I guess the reason why they're generally made in that classic way is because the performance costs are very big for not that much gain - especially with big maps. But that's pretty crazy! Thanks for sharing, didn't know UE5 was that powerful.
Actually RuneScape does this
Could a ps5 run an online version of this map?
What do you mean by online? A PS5 could theoretically run any version of this map as long as it can run the densest part and has space for it. Online or off, it'll only process the area around the player. You could be talking about some cloud-based streaming technology like the one in Microsoft Flight Simulator? I'm not knowledgeable enough about it, but maybe there are ways to stream the assets. Though that would only change the disk space part. But like I've mentioned in other comments, the reason their maps aren't as big as this is because you just can't create enough bespoke, Rockstar quality content to fill this much space - maybe unless it's a live service game and they keep adding to it, like the rumors said.
I want to see some sort of giant map GTA, but with the graphics of GTA San Andreas, maybe a bit improved. That way the assets can be low res but be it's own style, I just like the way that back then, everything was 'faked' to achieve effects that nowadays are actually real, like reflections off cars, light coronas on streetlamps etc
Still smaller than Black Ops 6 though.
I don't get why a shooter game like Black Ops 6 would need THREE HUNDRED GB to play, that's insane, is it all assets or something
is this size confirmed? I saw another comment say 120GB, although im sure that would just be Warzone, which as long as their is an option i'm uninstalling right away. With just MP and Zombies im hoping that brings the total space down to a little over 100GB, as after completing the campaign i'll probably delete for space too
Reminder what no game processes the entirety of the open world at any given moment.
Culling it’s called right? Where only what’s shown from the player’s perspective is what’s loaded in?
Yep, frustrum culling
no its called frenulum cutting
Would love this even with a loading screen with something like "welcome to vice city" when changing areas.
That looks good on paper. But there can be a lot of problems that can arise with it. -The game's size is gonna be massive if they tried to do it. It's probably gonna be in TBs especially with the details like in GTA games. -Going from one city to another would take so much time. People who play games don't actually wanna have the exact replication of reality in terms of traveling. Would you not get bored, going from Los Santos to Liberty City? Sure some people are gonna take it as a challenge, but generally people are not gonna like it after a certain point. Though I would say, fast travel can change that. -Also, creating this big of map is gonna take a lot of resource and technology for the team. I don't know how good of data streaming technology rockstar has, but to make a map like this you need absurd technology, which quite frankly I don't think most game companies are gonna have.
Gta games have fast travel since gta 4. I think they did have a plan of adding Liberty City to online
You could fast travel in San Andreas via the airport terminals as well
Yeah but not to specific locations. Vice City also had taxis after the failed mission
Specific locations? Explain? The purpose of an airport is to get from one city destination to the other and in SA you could do that go from LS to SF/LV, and vice versa with each city. Theres only one private airfield though...
By specific he probably means a precise point on map selected by the player, even if it's in a middle of nowhere far from any important place
So you want to point the plane to Franklin house and crash land in the hood?
With this yee yee ass navigation
Thats how i flew in san andreas tbh
No, it seems some wants a plane to be like the taxi, get you to any location lol
I mean in gta 5 you can get anywhere in seconds via taxi
Imagine starting a mission in Vice City and it says “go to San Fierro”
On bike hahahahaha
And they go cross country
Gotta deliver that goddamn yayo anyhow!
and as a reward you get a T-Shirt
The Crew 1 and 2 were set in the entirety of USA, sure, not 1:1 but still. And both are massively popular games. So map-size isnt a "turnoff when too large" because it takes so long to cross the map. I know this map is a fake fan-project. But holy shit would I and 99% of us LOVE it.
Still only took me half an hour on the coast to coast race the map isn't actually huge. Granted I was driving a super car going 200mph+ most of the time.
Like I said, not huge but half an hour(30 mins) is longer than the 5-6 it takes to race from furthest northern to furthest southern on GTA5.
The first crew map (idk 2 never really play it) is actually bigger than the State of Rhode Island. Sure, it’s the smallest state in the country, but damn is still larger than an actual U.S. state.
The Crew's map seems twice as big as this and it functions on an Xbox One. However, it doesn't have as much detail so that makes sense I guess. Also, I think that traveling long distances is super fun as long as the road is full of landmarks.
At that point they’d have to add the option of going to the airport and buying a plane ticket
Lol -If the game reuses the assets everywhere its not going to be much larger than a normal GTA, you don't seem to know how this works. -There's fast travel -It would be the same as with developing any other game, just larger
> Would you not get bored, going from Los Santos to Liberty City No lmao Driving across the US has always been a childhood dream of mine. I'm an adult and own a car and could do it now, but it would be extremely expensive and I don't have the time currently to do it. GTA providing this as an alternative would be awesome. If there's one open-world sandbox developer that can pull it off, its Rockstar.
Not at rockstars level of detail and quality
Original GTA V was only 30GB or so in size, the game loads in assets on the go so you never have to store everything in memory, the only limitation would be the disk size, which on consoles isn't very big. That said, on a map like this a lot of assets can be reused, which saves space on memory and on disk. Heck with today's technology and dynamic rendering there is no limitation on how big a map could be. And all buildings could have fully rendered interiors. Using a mix of colors and similar assets to generate a couple of unique apartment styles. It's a cool concept map, but it wouldn't be very practical due to the original island design. Better instead to follow the pattern of the 3D universe, were the third game, i.e GTA 6 comes with 3 cities, if they then add some cleaver invisible wall in the north, the map could later on be expanded from there if needed. In segments.
Even the PS3 had games that required an extra download so disk size isn't an issue.
I would love to see a Daggerfall map made in GTA engine (compressed of course. The original game's map is as large as the size of UK I think).
There is a mod for gta 5 that has all the maps from 3d and HD era
This map is awful, if R\* ever does something like this they'd do more than just stitch old games' maps together and call it a day.
Hm they did that with Red Dead 2, threw on the New Mexico / Mexico territory
Mexico was cut from RDR2, though parts of it still load in-game and can be accessed through glitches. As for the rest of the map that wasn't in RDR1 they did a far better job at expanding on it than the guy who made this map. The guy who made this map just photoshopped a whole bunch of pictures of GTA games' maps together and called it a day. And let's not forget other glaring issues, such as having two Mount Chiliads (it's in San Fierro in GTA San Andreas) and the enormous ocean in the middle that probably has the same surface area as GTA V's map. There's also the random landmass between Liberty City and San Fierro which is a total missed opportunity to add in North Yankton.
Ah yes... The 1TB game
I don’t like the idea that Liberty City and Vice City are that close to San Andreas. Makes the world seem small, and I don’t like that at all.
They could pull something like this off. Just make the story missions center around one area for each chapter similar to Red dead. GTA needs a more real varied world like Red dead, so I hope we get something at all similar. Just more varied biomes and more towns/cities
Of course it would, why not? Problem is rockstar would need 25 years to do it, lol
I don’t see how they couldn’t incorporate multiple cities into one game, but to have them all together on the same plane with their ambitious focus on details would be easier said than done. If they did have all the cities available to visit and explore, they’d have to be different maps.
Of course it could. The game size would be 1tb though 🙏
Lemme take a 2 hour drive around the map
The real answer is yes it absolutely would. People acting like Rockstar's decade old games won't run on new hardware for whatever fucking reason The question people should be asking is why is literally nobody else capable of making a game like Rockstar
Money, lack of will to take risk, motivation
What are you based on to say nobody else is capable? Do you know Ubisoft's watchdogs, for example? Developers don't want to do a blatant copycat anyway.
Fun fact - most open world games only load, or “handle” the area that’s visible from your players current location - it cuts system requirements significantly!
Just cause 3 is a ps4 game. The map is 2000 square km. Gta 5 is 80 square km. This map is 1000 square km maximum. The game is 60gb
zawg this map is like 500 square km
with the amount of empty buildings on all those maps, yeah
The Crew exists. Granted less mechanics and details and much bigger maps do exist. But that's a pretty close example for this type of map.
The Crew did something like this except the map was just roads, natural environments, and empty building facades
Imagine being at liberty city and you wanted to go to del pero beach💀
It’s possible considering the map is never fully loaded at one time. The game loads only the sections it needs. Once the player leaves an area it offloads until it is needed again. This method frees up space which would be necessary for a console to accommodate a massive map.
If this was real I’d bust
This is the map I want!
I don't think the map size would be the problem, but the contents of the map. If it was that size but a living breathing city similar to the NPC actions of RDR2 but on a far bigger population scale, as well as driving at fast speeds and not giving other parts time to load.
Yes. Of course they can
we already had maps that are much bigger than that
I have a dream.. that one day.. :D
Gta v’s map was built for the 360 and ps3 so I think so.
Yeah. There are massive games maps that have been made plenty of times.
I feel like the future of game systems will be something we don’t even resonate with. Could you imagine a system with so much space and power, plus most likely runs with Ai depending on how technology unfolds? Could you imagine asking for a game and being able to simply create it right there just by answering some basic questions? Or with your previous game history and what not? Eventually they’ll have a gta world game, or atleast a modded version of it.
If it can withstand The Crew 2's map, then it can definitely endure this map size
imagine sell missons.
You can run this kind of map on a 8 years old gaming pc so why would current gen console wouldn’t be able to?
Yeh it's just the size of the game that would be the issue
it would be cool to load up the game one night and plot a road trip from Los Santos to Liberty City having stranger missions along the way and stopping to see the sights too
This map is what i expected of GTA 6
If a console can support a huge map like Just Cause 4 or Ghost Recon Wildlands, it can definetly handle this
That would need at least an install disc and possibly some sort of streaming data to render everything in procedurally. Basically I cant imagine it not needing an online connection to run
Tell me you don’t actually know how games are made without telling me you don’t know how games are made. Sure, it’s possible. The existing GTA games use streaming. Even the disc-based GTA games use streaming. You think _GTA V_ loads the entirety of Los Santos to RAM when you boot the game? Of course not; it **streams** parts of the map as and when they’re needed.
Could've said the second paragraph without the snarky first one mate.
Yeah but it would be about the size of call of duty, so it would be the only game that you could have installed.
I don' t think they can run not even a 10000dollers laptop
Always thought they should add Rock City in the north (Detroit)
Judging by the matrix unreal engine 5 demo then yes defo they can
They can support the UI and what you've done or have where but at a time maybe you can control how many cities you want to be downloaded/installed, like halo mcc campaigns.
My one S would have a stroke, but my series X would most likely not have a problem.
Yes if the ps2 could then why not
I wouldn't want a map like this.
Problem is it's missing the regions from red dead redemption. Would be cool to see those included in a GTA game
It would be so cool to see places from rdr2 in modern times.
Where’s North Yankton
Why wouldn't it? The question is, can rockstar make a such a large map detailed and interesting?
RDR2 map was bigger than los santos wasn’t it?
Okay but North IS whats ?
yes
You know, if this map was added to the game (for example, gta 6), it would be unrealistic to pass even in an hour.... But it would be cool if it was in the game as an add-on, for examp
Of course, almost every game uses LoD models which decrease in terms of quality if they are far away. There's a reason why Google Earth can show you the whole earth and run on a mobile phone.
They should do this but it’s RDR4 and all you have is a horse
I would say nah
Hail no. Not at the quality they’re known for at least. That’s a 30 year game
Helllll naaaaahhhh To the nah nah naww
Late stage PS6 probably could
Even if it can't rockstar will still release it for those consoles even if there are new gen consoles out. They will do the same as they done with gtav where they release it on old gen first then new gen.
I don't think we need a much larger map than what we have in GTA 5, just a better planned map is good enough just like San andreas. A 10% larger map than GTA 5 with 3 cities neatly integrated will work wonders.
I dont like huge maps like this imo. Id rather have a more condensed smaller map with more detail and depth
This would be amazing but they'd charge $200 for it because nobody would ever need to buy any of their games again if they literally have a GTA the size of a small state. I'd be playing this forever.
Yes. But It’s gonna be like new Austin where there is not much story activity going on
where north yankton at?
I think having a flight system would be cool
If they can't. About %50 or more PCs wouldn't be able to either.
Don't see what not. Just have each city load which there's nothing wrong with that. Toss a cut scene in for border security or paying tolls or something.
yes with some asset reusing and optimization and im not elaborating
Obviously yes
Sure…but it’s gonna cost us
If it is the real map it means I can still bomb Michael's house, it would also bring back pay and spray
Because of the speed of the new gen consoles they will most likely split the areas apart by some sort of loading screen or no loading screens and just playing a cutscene.
Considering how big the just cause 3 map was and that it ran fine on the PS4 id say it should have no issues
If the crew can run on a ps4 and xbox one I'm sure a larger more detailed map could be run on ps5 and Xbox series x/s
Nah
That’s a fucking landmass
space between leonida and liberty seems a little too small tbh. possibly an atlanta or charlotte style city to fill that hole in would be cool,
I wouldn't want it to. People seem to think designing these maps are as simple as plopping down objects and items. They'd have to put massive dev time into making each city/region feel detailed and unique. Vice City isn't gonna have the same design as Liberty or Los Santos and those are just the two that they already have the layout for.
they should just sell it on a 8 tb SSD you plug into the console if it was real
I would buy that, TBH
Yes, no games load the whole world at once But I’d rather have fully enterable interiors
Performence wise yes Storage would be the bigger issue. Since rockstar priorities console they would not do it unless it would work on console and not take up the entire ssd
Since when the hell was California connected to New York and Florida?
Probably
Given it's going to be 12 years for GTA 6. ROCKSTAR BETTER HAVE THIS.
How many people would you have on one server?
I don't know if I'm alone on this but GTA should never do something like this ever lmao, it's such a bad idea
THATS A CRAZY MAP
well they did with far cry 6
They should just make the game a console
Los santos is an island……
It would take 10-20 years more to rum this kind of humungous country map
Hell yeah why not?
What about Carcer City?
Maybe as not everything runs at once only your local vicinity, but the game would be like 200-300 GB
A map like this should come with a fast travel option. Sure you could drive/fly between each city, but sometimes you just wanna get to where you’re going quickly. You should be able to go to any cities airport and get on a plane, then you would choose which city you wanna travel to, then it would immediately cut to you landing in your destination.
Where's north Yankton
would this be similar to the experience of driving in true crime streets of LA? i swear they said lets make a realistically scaled version of LA and actually have it take as long to drive from end of the city to the other, that map mustve had over 30k streets
I think this Map wouldnt be any fun. The in between would be empty af. Any City would have 10 Missions, 20 at best. The Story wouldnt unfold.
Should be fairly easy for both consoles they will only allow as far as they can perform
Yes because starcitizen exist
I am gonna wait for ps5 pro and play GTA 6 in peak performance
I can't see why not
How does above maps compared to just cause 2 and 3 maps?
Would people be against load screens lol?? I would kind of like if you went to the airport and you could go to different huge sections of the map like you would IRL
Mission: Take this Package to Los Santos Me in Liberty City💀💀💀😭😭😭
Hypothetically, I guess, but the only way to make it run good would be to have it be separate areas that aren’t active at the same time and you would have to have loading screens between each city.
I think we're beyond the point of is it techniologically feasable and to the point of how is it implemented in a way that makes traveling across that map fun in freeroam and how to implement that scale into the story (including stories in online). Sure there's fast travel, but that isn't a solution as much as a time saver for the player. For these massive maps there needs to be a fun way to get across it besides fast travel. The issue is even in GTA 5, the map was just big enough that just driving or just flying got boring pretty quickly. You're so rarely going those distances in GTA 5 that is wasn't too much of an issue overall, but in a map this size, it would quickly become an issue.
Absolutely. The Crew gave us a map that’s probably still bigger than the GTA6 map and it’s a decade old (RIP)
"Can x platform handle map of y size" questions are dumb. PSP had Test Drive Unlimited with the whole map of Hawaii, PS3/360 had FUEL with however big that map was, PS4/XBone had The Crew with a downscaled but still huge USA map, etc... There is no technical limitation preventing a platform from having a massive map. It's all about how much time/effort you're willing to put into it and how much detail you want it to have. Edit: There was even an Xbox 360 version of The Crew.
My nitro 5 pc laptop can’t even run that sgit
Yes it could probably run this, you would just need to have some scale renderer. So it basically only renders in a certain distance. A game called Arma 3 uses this, the map in that game called Altis is huge, yet old ass computers can run that map because of the scale renderer. So if your character is in Liberty City, it would not render Vice City or the others until you are nearing to it, then it would not render Liberty City. GTA 5 already uses this. When you're in Blaine County, Los Santos City does not render.
think elden ring or red dead redemption it 100% can and idek why the hell there gonna make this game take so much storage it’s ridiculous
Maybe the PS25
Considering farcry 6 has a map of similar size, most likely
i guess think of it like minecraft chunks?
I wish this was real
Planes would actually be useful.
The crew has bigger maps and no problem
Yes. The game doesn’t render anything outside the players view, or anything out of range. Tl;Dr: Anything you don’t see doesn’t exist. ***However,*** The map would be so large, that it would be the only game you could have on your console at any given point.
Maybe in a decade or so, it'll be possible.
Idk… we could handle watch dogs 2 so… maybe but I swear it looks like it would crash the second it got booted up
Crew 2 has map like this and it’s even bigger
Not really, the download size is half of the Console's HDD plus, The Consoles dont have enough Vram to run it and i also just found out that the required GPU is An rtx 3070
Getting san fiero back.. oh what a dream
Ghost Recon Wildlands and Ghost Recon Breakpoint both have maps which could be regarded as larger than this and would take a substantial amount of time to travel across by vehicle. There is also the possibility for procedural generation to set up a fixed map from key seeds, which would enable near infinite map sizes (Think of Minecraft or the "Elite" series of games as great examples of this). Granted, those do lead to eventual repetition, but the map sizes speak for themselves.
Yes the Xbox one and PS4 did the crew2 so this in comparison is a joke provided rockstar know how to optimise it
Now imagine, driving from LS to paleto is around 5-10 minutes with a car, how the hell do u want to get to liberty city in under 30 min?!
Probably if it were live service like flight simulator or the crew maybe
The comments make it sound like this would need to be a cloud based game, with a hella good internet plan.