For those of you who play the game but have never been to Los Angeles, here you can see how close the game is to the real thing. :) The video is without commentary, just ambient sound. It lacks the gang areas but shows the city centre and beach and basically most of the stuff we see in Los Santos.
! No longer available (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O88M1KYSNLQ#)
Good one - maybe R* used that video to create the game. I lived in southern California for many years, and it never looked that clean and tidy 8-X
The roads are so bad (especially the 5) that I do everything I can to avoid them. Drive the 5 for a short while and it beats you (and your car) to death!
I didn't watch the video (yet) but isn't that small tower i nthe starting screen what we now as the pacific standard bank? ????
Good find :-X
You can see how much trouble the game devs went to. People who live in LA and who play GTA V can probably find their way around Los Santos with no problems - it'd be just like home to them :-()
We could use a hardrock cafe in LS 8)
Quote from: PZ on January 27, 2016, 11:38:02 AM
Good one - maybe R* used that video to create the game. I lived in southern California for many years, and it never looked that clean and tidy 8-X
Rockstar had to do some extensive field research in Los Angeles so they could get the game right ;) Rockstar talked to gangs, FBI undercover agents and many others (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_Grand_Theft_Auto_V#Research_and_open_world_design) to create one of the best games for the last gen consoles :o They even took 250 000 photographs of L.A to get it right in-game ???
And you're right, they used documentaries and Google Maps :-D
:-X :)
I don't really agree with this statement in the article that GKID linked to:
"Lead mission designer Imran Sarwar felt that having multiple protagonists allowed different strategic options to open up in missions. He said that in a combat scenario the player can set up Michael at a high vantage point with a sniper rifle to provide covering fire for Trevor, who provides a frontal assault on the enemy position, allowing Franklin to manipulate flank points".
If only...
I can recall very, very few instances where that kind of flexibility existed in the game. In fact the only instance I can recall of what the designer is describing was the assault on the lumberyard, where you could choose where to put Trevor and Franklin while Michael covered with sniper rifle - but even then, your choices were between a couple of preset locations, not just wherever you wanted. I found the game to be extremely restrictive in terms of giving you any kind of tactical positioning choices, if any at all - your characters were almost always compelled to be wherever the game put them (and be armed with whatever weapons the game dictated) and often if they were covering you couldn't move them from those spots. There was some flexibility in some missions, but very little and not often. What the designer described above sounds more like something they thought about implementing in a major way but never did, or changed their minds about.
But there's no denying the amazing job they did of creating the game world. I really never have seen anything like it. In terms of scale it's not the biggest game ever. The above article reported 49 square miles - FC2's world represented fifty square miles so it was actually slightly bigger, and the Just Cause worlds are immense. But in terms of diversity of places and people, and the sense of being in an inhabited world, it's a stand-out. You don't often see the same NPC twice. The diversity of people is not just huge in terms of clothing styles and colours but in body shapes, ages and nationalities (no kids though, which I think is just as well). And they seem to be living lives and doing stuff, not just bots milling around aimlessly. I think it's the best "general public" creation I've seen in a game. Then there are all the animals, both domestic and wild. I've seen at least eight different breeds each of pet dogs and cats in inhabited areas, and lots of different wild animals, which contribute to the overall sense of being in a living environment. Sometimes you have to be on your guard in the wild as predators like mountain lions can kill you very abruptly, as in once they're on you you've had it, but at least you're not up to your armpits in them like you sometimes are in FC4.
Speaking of FC4, whenever I hear an eagle's cry in GTA V I instinctively look up and get ready to shoot, even though they don't attack in this game :-() The sound effect is almost identical in both games.
Animals are mostly absent in the online game except for decoration purposes (mainly fish and birds) but the SP experience is indeed colourful. I remember a cat that came strolling about, saw me, came to rub its head on my legs, lay down on my feet, curl up and fall asleep. It was cute alright :-D
Also, I found a cat curled up and asleep in a backyard. I sneaked up on it and then made a noise. It would jump straight up and dash away in horror. :laugh:
lol, I hated those eagles in FC4
The other day I was looking at a list on YouTube of the ten most annoying enemies in video games (on WatchMojo channel). The eagles in FC4 were rated number 7 :-()
:-D
Quote from: fragger on January 31, 2016, 09:43:17 PM
- FC2's world represented fifty square miles so it was actually slightly bigger...
Some of those square miles wasn't accessible though :-( What I like about GTA V is that the entire map can be explored from start (in difference to Ubisoft, which insists using the "do X missions to unlock the next region" formula...)
I totally agree about having the entire map open from the start - having to complete missions just to visit another area always annoyed me with the AC series, and is just plain stupid.
Not positive, but I recall the FC2 map being 50 square kilometers which at the time was large but now seems to be tiny.
Sometimes I think the entire world in GTA San Andreas was even bigger than this new GTA V map. There were 3 islands, 3 cities.... it was incredible. But the lvl of detail and the way this game world feels, complete and real, makes up for it big time.
The biggest game I've ever played was probably Fuel. It was enormous, and completely open world. But the world was completely empty, except for the plants and trees of course.
..which were rock solid, even a grass blade could bring a tank with a "clank" to a full stop. So no cross-country.
Since I'm going to folk high school next year (going to study game development most likely), the class takes a two week trip to L.A/San Franscisco from the 12th-27th of November. It will be amazing to see L.A for real 8) Having 260+ hours playing GTA, I will probably recognize most of the locations I have already seen in-game ;)
wow, all the best to you, enjoy :-X :)
Sounds like it will be quite the adventure!
Have fun Gkid, Don't look too much at the buildings 8-X :angel:
:laugh: Will try not to ;)
Don't go stealing other peoples' cars or picking fights with people on the street either. Leave your inner Trevor at home :-()
Seriously, I hope you have a great time in L.A. GKID, should be a cool experience 8)
:laugh:
Thanks fragger :)
Exercise care, GKID - I've lived in southern California for many years, and my son still lives there - the reality is far from the game, mainly due to the people, not the landscape. Many visitors have been victimized on the streets of L.A. Ensure what you do does not target you as a naive visitor.
Of course, I tend to be the paranoid type, but I like to be on the safe side.
Thanks :)
Care should be taken whenever visiting any foreign city, really. There aren't many cities in the world that are free of opportunistic lowlifes who will target apparent newcomers.
Geez, I don't want to scare you off Gkid :) You're an intelligent and sensible person, you'll be just fine 8) It's the fools who go on stupid and draw attention to themselves with idiot behaviour that bring trouble down on themselves. Some of them might as well wear a fluorescent tee-shirt with "I AM A CLUELESS TOURIST" printed on it in big letters, front and back :-()
I know, but yeah, you should always take care when visiting a foreign country. ;) I hope I don't experience any troubles down there ^-^ Just found out that there is a Microcenter located 1 hour from the airport. Definitely going there to find some good deals on hardware :-D
So, are you planning to travel back on board of a container ship? :-D
No, I don't think so ;) :laugh:
:laugh:
Going to stay here (https://www.hiusa.org/hostels/california/san-francisco/downtown) in SF. Located very close to shopping centers/restaurants according to Google maps ^-^ JUST 3 WEEKS
Not sure where we are going to stay in LA, will get to that later ;)
Frisco for appetizer? Not too shabby :)
Yep, the goal there is to get an insight in the computer world by visiting Silicon Valley (Google, Facebook and the other large companies) :)
take a bite.. at apple, perhaps :-()
That was punny, Art :laugh: :-D
:-X
Bet you're getting exited now, GKID :) :-X
For some reason, San Francisco and Sydney are known as "sister cities". I can't for the life of me see any resemblance whatsoever, apart from the fact that both cities are located next to large bodies of water, each has an iconic bridge, and each has an abandoned prison in its harbour. San Francisco Bay is immense compared to Port Jackson, Sydney Harbour Bridge is dwarfed by the Golden Gate and is of a totally different design (plus the Harbour Bridge is right smack in the CBD while the Golden Gate isn't), Alcatraz Island has a large and relatively recent prison on it while tiny Fort Denison goes back to colonial times, Sydney is flat while Frisco is hilly, the city layouts are completely unalike, Sydney is on an east coast while Frisco is on a west one, Sydney has a thriving beach culture while Frisco doesn't, and the prevailing climate is different. And of course they're in opposing hemispheres.
Other than that, yeah, they're dead ringers for one another... ::)
Hmm, interesting facts, fragger :)