This is what they took from us

Jesus Christ are you me

The map was both too small to represent a state, and too large to load in the entire map at once for excessively underpowered hardware.

So the entire game had to cut corners everywhere, all while trying to add more and more things to it. It's a contradictory mess, and the whole map, especially with police chases just feels too big for it, when all of the other games in the 3D era (3, Vice City, Liberty City Stories, Vice City Stories) were far more constrained in their map size, leading to chases that were harder to escape from.

wtf are you talking about loser

Attached: 1578764148856.png (1920x1080, 510.15K)

I hate these pictures so much

Reminder that this game was developed primarily with the PS2 in mind. The game was later ported to Xbox and PC, and the ONLY version that comes to mind these days is the PC version (and for good reason).

The PS2's hardware was laughably primitive compared to PC and Xbox, yet Rockstar had an obligation to do absolutely everything to get the game to run on it.

saved

Attached: 1604286456550.png (1024x766, 114.2K)

GTA V also has horrible map layout, there are parts of the map that are only connected the the rest of the map by auxiliary roads you never drive through because there are much faster routes. So you never accidentally stumble across a good chunk of the map.

Damn, I do not remember that area in the top left corner at all. Guess I need to replay.

pc is soulless

Attached: 1584782930848.jpg (1280x720, 127.59K)

>>The 3 cities actually give those highways a destination. So it feels like you're actually going somewhere.

Yeah what sucks about V's map is that it's obvious that they cut San Fierro and Las Venturas out to save time and some point during the early stages of the game.

You can tell by driving around the map:

>San Fierro (The Bay Area) should be right above Paleto Bay

>Las Venturas is located IN the Grand Senora Desert (right when you get on the highway near the Diamond Casino). That highway should take you to Las Venturas just like in the original SA.

sounds like an issue with the player not the game

>shoulda followed the zipline cj

Why would they cut that shit out, though? Time restraints? Having to dumb down that shit for the 360 and PS3?

It's amazing how a simple multiply filter made the console version so damn kino. Also why the fuck was it so hard for the retard code monkeys to implement that they omitted it?

its basically cut content, if i remember correctly there was supposed to be a giant mission that took you up there and utilized a lot of the space but was cut due to timing constraints

gta.fandom.com/wiki/The_Truth_is_Out_There

>GTA SA has a filter
le soul
>GTA IV has a filter
REEEEEEEEEEEEE

This game was too ambitious for its own good.

>Having to dumb down that shit for the 360 and PS3?

Had GTA5 been released a year later as a PS4 launch title I BET we would have had San Fierro and Las Venturas in the game. Maybe even San Diego and Orange County too. They would have had more space to work with.

But then again the game wouldn't have sold a gazillion copies because not everyone would have had a next gen system by then.

I think that the cut content, the infighting with Benzies and the Housers causing the core team to quit, Gtaonline fiasco, would never have happened had GTA5 been a PS4 launch title.

We'd still have the Rockstar Games of old.

How were the graphics for its time?
Okay or just bad? I mean comparing it to Half Life 2 or Farcry, games which got released in the same year its a big difference.

It may be wonky, but the fact you can play San Andreas on a phone is pretty cool. I remember hoping SA would get a PSP version after LCS and VCS

Definately time constraints and the shit hardware. It really is a shame that they never made single player dlc.

Attached: 1604947486919.jpg (1200x1200, 191.91K)

That's a really sick render, how'd they do it?

GTAO is too profitable , single player DLC is ancient history

the visuals were perfectly fine and, given the expansive open-world nature of the game (which wasn't a meme yet and was considered a boon rather than a hindrance), its quite amazing that the game ran on the ps2 at all, the devs had to implement several clever tactics just to get it within budget of the cpu and memory
a lot of people have forgotten this because the PC version, specifically the steam version, is complete trash
see: not only is the lighting and atmosphere completely different, notice that in the PC version the "dirty car" mechanic that reflects what terrain the car has traversed doesn't even work, its just stuck in the permanent "dirtiest" mode, there are a handful of other flaws like this in the pc version, so many that a lot of people choose to downgrade the steam version to the 1.0 patch and then fix it with community updates where you can choose if you want something exactly like the ps2 release, or updated textures, different lighting, etc.

as a personal testament, i remember it looking great for the time, save the fact that all the characters fingers are "fused" together, making certain cutscenes look quite bad

Attached: af2.png (600x508, 255.95K)

Pretty sure GTA is kind of known for it's outdated graphics.

>How were the graphics for its time?
Even back in 2004 this game had aged visually and gameplay wise.

GTA 4 and GTA 5 were pretty cutting edge for their release date.

For a PS2 game it looked great, it's not fair to compare it to cutting edge PC games at the time.

The map is still big. Consider the scale. Consider how small the player character is on that map

(cont.)

It would have made more sense having 3 playable characters in the game too. Having each character start out in one of the 3 cities:

Trevor living in Las Venturas (or living on the outskirts of Las Ventures in the Senora desert like he already is in the game)

Michael doing his Witness protection bit in San Fierro (the Yoga/California religion/Kifflom stuff would make more sense in the bay area). Along with having the Life Invader stuff taking place their too.

Franklin (being a homage to CJ) would start out in Los Santos.

The story would be each character progressing around the map to the different cities and meeting up with each other eventually.

GTA5's story never sat well with me and felt like a compromise.

It still hurts that we didn't get this map with GTA 5....

Now that would've been a GTA worth playing for a decade before VI comes out (which is how far apart the releases are going to be at this rate). Imagine a map where planes were worth a damn and that a road trip would have a purpose instead of a pointless lap around the empty northern part of the map.
The pain of what we lost... won't stop hurting...

I agree. V feels pretty rushed now that you mention it.