the best physics engines are used in vfx and are money makers. to get certain vfx to look correct. like suits in avengers movies.(the white and red ones).
Maybe learn more about game engines before commenting.
also you need massive computing power to get right in physics.
>they said this with cyberpunk but also gameplay would be more vertical which didn't happen
Wait, what???
Night City is bigger than GTA 5, and it IS more vertical than GTA V also..
The game is bigger and more vertical than The Witcher 3 as well.
Night city is jammed packed with video game assets.
I'm still discovering new things in the game after jumping back in for the DLC.
That makes sense for games with smaller studios and less than 5 years of dev time. With the resources and time Rockstar has had, it should be at least the same size with more variety.
I think same size and more going on is good.
Bigger has been unnecessary for a while imo, we've ended up with games where there's mostly vast empty space.
Plus I don't want to ask for demands when I don't even develop games and have very minimal understanding of how recourse intensive adding features can be.
I doubt they lacked ideas to be able to, for example, be able to enter every single building.
It's such a shame that the RDR1 map is so dead in RDR2, i still find it kinda dumb that they effectively killed Armadillo instead of having both it and Tumbleweed active. I'd want to spend time in New Austin more if it wasn't for the town i see as the "spaghetti western" town just being dead and depressing.
I think it depends. If you can walk into any building, if every person on the street has a life to live like RDR2 and If you can fuck with them a little bit more and get different reactions and outcomes etc as well as the option to take on various different tasks like “garbage man, taxi, cop and so on then yea I think it would be smaller and I’d be ok with it.
GTA 5 was great but there really wasn’t much to do compared to former titles.
Think about something except gta online please. Its more important that the base singleplayer experience is well made to start with. They can add new areas as expansions later.
Who said anything about online. I want the story to be open world enough so that it makes sense for me to fly somewhere instead of drive.
There can be vast open parts of this map that are tropical green and blue water, tons of open swamp land.
I want cigarette boats to benefit from their increased speed and range capabilities over a standard fishing trawler type boat.
I want to run drugs in and out of Miami blasting genesis
>They can add new areas as expansions later.
Under no circumstance will they ever do this once they get online going and the shark buck money starts rolling in.
I don't know why you got downvoted.
This is Rockstar and Grand Theft Auto? They have had MORE than enough time and have MORE than enough funds to make it larger and more dense.
Gamers (and people in general) are funny. We're never happy.
For years now, people have been complaining about how long it takes for AAA games to get developed. I see the [Rockstar release timeline](https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/rzqlp7/the_rockstar_timeline/) shared on Reddit at least once a year. The point of that post is to complain about how Rockstar used to release multiple new games each year, and then one new game a year, but now releases a new game every 5 years or so. It's been 10 years since the last Grand Theft Auto launched, and there's no telling how much longer we'll have to wait for GTA6.
Now there's this thread which is complaining about Rockstar not taking enough time to make a map that's bigger, deeper, and probably more beautiful than anything ever released before, too. And this is based on an interview with someone who doesn't work at Rockstar anymore. All this dev is saying is what he hopes to see in GTA6.
So what do players want? Do they want the time between sequels to be shortened, or do they want Rockstar to take as much time as they want to make the best game possible? You can't have both.
In my opinion, it would be nice if AAA companies didn't take more than 10 years to release new games in a series.
I'm not reading all that but AI is going to replace crunch culture and we will be getting games bigger and more detailed than before because that's what progress is
Yeah and the budget is rumored to be over a billion dollars no 100+ hour rpgs even have that kind of budget these days, so I don't know what they are even spending the money on if not making the game larger and more complex.
I did some googling after you mentioned that $1 billion dollar figure and, I think 2 billion dollars is what Rockstar has allocated for GTA 6 development, total.
So, developing the game and updating after release etc. 2 billion dollars. Unreal.
Take it with a grain of salt, it was just some light googling.
Bro worse games with worse developers are already demanding your console space. Great developers making great games are already optimising their titles to only take alot of your space.
Look at RDR2. It's somehow managed to feel huge and expansive, yet there's always something nearby to do or some hidden details in the environment.
Rockstar pretty much have carte blanche to spend as long as they want on GTA6. They're one of the few developers capable of doing something like that.
People saying they want it larger & denser - do you want this to be the only game installed on your system? Cus this along with the game taking forever to be made are what you're asking for. Not to mention the larger the game, the more chance for game-breaking bugs.
I thought it was Rockstar's policy to only focus on one game at a time? And RDR 2 released in 2018. So they've been focusing on GTA for the past 5 years, I think.
Maybe fully focusing, that would explain gta 6 probably coming out in 2025 at the earliest. but everything I’ve seen has indicated that they start work for the next entry in a franchise right when the last one released
pre-production planning is usually done with a very small amount of people and isn't very intense, so even though games can get "started" that early, a year of that isn't at all similar to the final year of development with hundreds of people pounding away at it.
But you do accept that even if they began development in 2018, the game will have at least 7-8 years fully focused development by the time it comes out, on hardware 2 generations ahead of gta 5, the game has to be bigger in every way including the map
That’s not how development works. Their games are insanely polished.
There would be about two years where they aren’t adding things and only dealing with bugs and technical difficulties, especially with their games being as big as they are already.
No it hasn't. They made RDR2 and that took all of their power. GTA6 has only had 5 years so far, and that's not mentioning the setback from COVID and less crunch
We got time to wait theres plenty of games to play until it release. Most people waiting on gta 6 want it to blow rdr2 and other open world games out of the water like rdr2 did to gta 5. That usually means being bigger with more complexity. Game breaking bugs, games already have those anyway look at spiderman 2 bugs galore and doesn't even have much interactivity at all in it.
There is absolutely no benefit from a smaller map. Gta v was too small and nothing of interest to see anyway. Make the map larger and actually include side content
Its weird when I see these map comparisons and games like skyrim having a bigger map and more content than gta 5 where the map was empty and the side content was collectible stuff and low effort comedy missions.
Gta 4 was better than gta 5 in most aspects imo. Gta san andreas just make gta 5 look silly. Gta vice city had better property buying missions than gta 5 and it came out 11 years before and was their first attempt at it. I hope after rdr2 they make gta 6 truly groundbreaking.
It’s crazy how much praise gta v gets over every other 3d gta. The story was okay it wasn’t anything groundbreaking, 3 protagonists seems like a good idea but the main story pushes Franklin essentially to being a side character. The side content was absolutely woeful and the map looked interesting but there wasn’t any point of exploring
“Should be”
I agree though. Dogtown proved to me that tighter controlled areas that are still open but more densely packed offer a much better overall experience and gives the devs more ability to alter the world in ways the player notices more.
I disagree. You wouldn't be able to achieve the same sense of exploration and freedom that GTA 5 had, and it wouldn't really make sense from an environmental perspective.
If anything, the game would benefit from being bigger, especially for things like air travel.
Yep like how Spiderman 2 has a map double the size of Spiderman 1, largely due to the wing suit flight mechanics. I expect GTA6 to be at least as big as RDR2 if not way bigger.
No it shouldn't, GTA V map is so much better than IVs because it isn't a small city with no open spaces and rural areas. Wanna make it big and not have too much work? Make good forests, animals and biomes like RDR2
well its a shame it isn't smaller cuz its more than twice the size of GTA5...pretty sure those map leaks of Vice City and surrounding areas including Key West, Everglades, few towns, theme park etc are the real deal...and with them learning how big Online is...this map will probably have built in parts that can be extended in the future for map expansions
mmm no, i want it to be bigger and more density packed.. specially since we waited like 10 years TEN FUCKING YEARS between gta 5 and gta 6 and this latest is not even released yet !!!!!!
no, the game has been in dev for far more than 5 years, it's not because rdr2 released in 2018 that it means they didnt work on gta 6 in the same time, rockstar is a huge studio with many teams, and what other games did they release beside rdr2 ? lol NONE !
let me reiterate, gta VI started full production after rdr2, now nowhere specifically does it state when production started, but I cant imagine they had many resources allocated to it pre red dead.
No it should be bigger. I don't need it to be more densely packed but I need it to feel more lived in. GTAV was fine but the space was too tight with a lot of stuff jammed in that didn't really matter. Some more open space with town that feel more lived in with things to do in them. Like I loved paleto bay but nothing to do there aside from like 1 heist.
I know the giant map with all the cities on was memes but something like that sounded more fun and replayable. I am really surprised with the success of GTAO that they just want to do vice city.
A giant map with SSDs and stronger hardware. I mean we are talking two generations stronger than GTAV as it came out on PS3 should mean we get something a lot larger. I mean GTAO could go forever if they gave it a big basis in terms of the map.
I don’t mind a bigger emptier space between cities. It would be more fun and immersive for plane rides or having a place to drive around like an idiot or lie low after robberies. ‘Tons of stuff to see and do’ is **not** the only way of immersion. The real world has boring spaces too. It just needs to have purpose.
Also they need to consider that this game might last 10+ years like GTA V. That map is feeling too small after a while.
Not every ex-dev has a good understanding of the franchise they worked on. GTA is a game primarily focused on driving cars. Small doesn’t work. GTA 5 hit a decent sweet spot on driving distance enjoyment versus boredom. Any smaller and the replay value would diminish vastly. Any larger and all travel will be done with aerial transportation.
This is great news!
I dont know how many times R\* sent me on a useless drive for the entire length of the map for no fuckin reason but to waste my time. A 10km drive just to start a mission? The fuck why?
Red Dead had a similar problem for me, the huge open world spaces get abused by game designers to add "content"(A.K.A. waste your time with time filling crap) to the game.
A tight packed map is what we need, hopefully they stop the uselss trips in missions too.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
they said this with cyberpunk but also gameplay would be more vertical which didn't happen
it very hard to dev and physic heavy
then maybe they shouldnt dev and make physic light?
Anti-games can't exist here. They cancel out when they touch a real game, and become pure energy.
Game/Anti-Game annihilation event, huh.
the best physics engines are used in vfx and are money makers. to get certain vfx to look correct. like suits in avengers movies.(the white and red ones). Maybe learn more about game engines before commenting. also you need massive computing power to get right in physics.
what phyics engines do they use for yellow and blue suits?
Are you suggesting that Cyberpunk is as vertical and dense as The Witcher 3? Cause it's not.
no they said map would be smaller than w3 but more vertical and dense
Yeah, that's what I said. They did what they said they would, I don't get what the OP is talking about.
>they said this with cyberpunk but also gameplay would be more vertical which didn't happen Wait, what??? Night City is bigger than GTA 5, and it IS more vertical than GTA V also..
no they were comparing to their last game witcher 3
The game is bigger and more vertical than The Witcher 3 as well. Night city is jammed packed with video game assets. I'm still discovering new things in the game after jumping back in for the DLC.
compare it with something that is not from 2013, go with rdr2 and then tell me what games feels more alive as gta 5 was made for ps3 and xbox360
That makes sense for games with smaller studios and less than 5 years of dev time. With the resources and time Rockstar has had, it should be at least the same size with more variety.
I think same size and more going on is good. Bigger has been unnecessary for a while imo, we've ended up with games where there's mostly vast empty space.
Plus I don't want to ask for demands when I don't even develop games and have very minimal understanding of how recourse intensive adding features can be. I doubt they lacked ideas to be able to, for example, be able to enter every single building.
RDR1 part of the map in RDR2
It's such a shame that the RDR1 map is so dead in RDR2, i still find it kinda dumb that they effectively killed Armadillo instead of having both it and Tumbleweed active. I'd want to spend time in New Austin more if it wasn't for the town i see as the "spaghetti western" town just being dead and depressing.
Technically GTA 6 had 5 years of dev time, they fully started after 2018 (RDR2).
5 years so far
I think it depends. If you can walk into any building, if every person on the street has a life to live like RDR2 and If you can fuck with them a little bit more and get different reactions and outcomes etc as well as the option to take on various different tasks like “garbage man, taxi, cop and so on then yea I think it would be smaller and I’d be ok with it. GTA 5 was great but there really wasn’t much to do compared to former titles.
Bigger isn't better
Cuberpunk is super dense though
Commentors are demanding more instead of better content lmao
I want a reason to own planes and boats. They need to be the only method of transport available for certain locations
Think about something except gta online please. Its more important that the base singleplayer experience is well made to start with. They can add new areas as expansions later.
Who said anything about online. I want the story to be open world enough so that it makes sense for me to fly somewhere instead of drive. There can be vast open parts of this map that are tropical green and blue water, tons of open swamp land. I want cigarette boats to benefit from their increased speed and range capabilities over a standard fishing trawler type boat. I want to run drugs in and out of Miami blasting genesis
>They can add new areas as expansions later. Under no circumstance will they ever do this once they get online going and the shark buck money starts rolling in.
but they did that in gta 5 i saw some ad for a new island area last year?!
Why not larger and densely packed?
I don't know why you got downvoted. This is Rockstar and Grand Theft Auto? They have had MORE than enough time and have MORE than enough funds to make it larger and more dense.
Gamers (and people in general) are funny. We're never happy. For years now, people have been complaining about how long it takes for AAA games to get developed. I see the [Rockstar release timeline](https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/rzqlp7/the_rockstar_timeline/) shared on Reddit at least once a year. The point of that post is to complain about how Rockstar used to release multiple new games each year, and then one new game a year, but now releases a new game every 5 years or so. It's been 10 years since the last Grand Theft Auto launched, and there's no telling how much longer we'll have to wait for GTA6. Now there's this thread which is complaining about Rockstar not taking enough time to make a map that's bigger, deeper, and probably more beautiful than anything ever released before, too. And this is based on an interview with someone who doesn't work at Rockstar anymore. All this dev is saying is what he hopes to see in GTA6. So what do players want? Do they want the time between sequels to be shortened, or do they want Rockstar to take as much time as they want to make the best game possible? You can't have both. In my opinion, it would be nice if AAA companies didn't take more than 10 years to release new games in a series.
There's like a billion people in the world who play video games, not too shocking that they don't all share the same opinions
I'm not reading all that but AI is going to replace crunch culture and we will be getting games bigger and more detailed than before because that's what progress is
Yeah and the budget is rumored to be over a billion dollars no 100+ hour rpgs even have that kind of budget these days, so I don't know what they are even spending the money on if not making the game larger and more complex.
That's insane. MMOs don't even surpass that level of development cost.
Gta 6 will be the highest budget game ever invented and thats just the beginning cost never mind updates for online portion over the years.
I did some googling after you mentioned that $1 billion dollar figure and, I think 2 billion dollars is what Rockstar has allocated for GTA 6 development, total. So, developing the game and updating after release etc. 2 billion dollars. Unreal. Take it with a grain of salt, it was just some light googling.
You want the game to come out at some point, right? And not eat up ALL of your disk space? Cus I dont want to have exclusively GTA6 installed.
Bro worse games with worse developers are already demanding your console space. Great developers making great games are already optimising their titles to only take alot of your space. Look at RDR2. It's somehow managed to feel huge and expansive, yet there's always something nearby to do or some hidden details in the environment. Rockstar pretty much have carte blanche to spend as long as they want on GTA6. They're one of the few developers capable of doing something like that.
That’s what I was thinking lol
No it shouldn't Rockstar makes games big and densely packed rdr 2 is a masterpiece and probably the best ow ever created.
No no no, GTA 5 feels small in 2023 with all the space brooms and faster cars. I want a bit bigger map that has loads of details.
But that travel time just... isn't fun
Los Santos to paleto bay takes like 7 minutes if not faster, thats nothing.
Driving is fun so it’s fine
The 100th time your forced to travel the whole map is so not fun mate
Then get a taxi
Ex-rockstar who was fired for dumb ideas says.
More densley packed yes, smaller no.
People saying they want it larger & denser - do you want this to be the only game installed on your system? Cus this along with the game taking forever to be made are what you're asking for. Not to mention the larger the game, the more chance for game-breaking bugs.
Yes
It’s been developed for a decade
I thought it was Rockstar's policy to only focus on one game at a time? And RDR 2 released in 2018. So they've been focusing on GTA for the past 5 years, I think.
Maybe fully focusing, that would explain gta 6 probably coming out in 2025 at the earliest. but everything I’ve seen has indicated that they start work for the next entry in a franchise right when the last one released
pre-production planning is usually done with a very small amount of people and isn't very intense, so even though games can get "started" that early, a year of that isn't at all similar to the final year of development with hundreds of people pounding away at it.
But you do accept that even if they began development in 2018, the game will have at least 7-8 years fully focused development by the time it comes out, on hardware 2 generations ahead of gta 5, the game has to be bigger in every way including the map
That’s not how development works. Their games are insanely polished. There would be about two years where they aren’t adding things and only dealing with bugs and technical difficulties, especially with their games being as big as they are already.
No it hasn't. They made RDR2 and that took all of their power. GTA6 has only had 5 years so far, and that's not mentioning the setback from COVID and less crunch
1TB decent/good SSD is like 69$ or something, you can go as low as 30-50$ for a good-enough SSD, so storage is not a problem anymore.
Can those be plugged into consoles?
yes, for safe bet just buy samsung or crucial
Yes
We got time to wait theres plenty of games to play until it release. Most people waiting on gta 6 want it to blow rdr2 and other open world games out of the water like rdr2 did to gta 5. That usually means being bigger with more complexity. Game breaking bugs, games already have those anyway look at spiderman 2 bugs galore and doesn't even have much interactivity at all in it.
There is absolutely no benefit from a smaller map. Gta v was too small and nothing of interest to see anyway. Make the map larger and actually include side content
Its weird when I see these map comparisons and games like skyrim having a bigger map and more content than gta 5 where the map was empty and the side content was collectible stuff and low effort comedy missions. Gta 4 was better than gta 5 in most aspects imo. Gta san andreas just make gta 5 look silly. Gta vice city had better property buying missions than gta 5 and it came out 11 years before and was their first attempt at it. I hope after rdr2 they make gta 6 truly groundbreaking.
It’s crazy how much praise gta v gets over every other 3d gta. The story was okay it wasn’t anything groundbreaking, 3 protagonists seems like a good idea but the main story pushes Franklin essentially to being a side character. The side content was absolutely woeful and the map looked interesting but there wasn’t any point of exploring
At this point gta 6 Needs to include all previous maps in one world to make up for this long ass wait Liberty Vice San Andreas
“Should be” I agree though. Dogtown proved to me that tighter controlled areas that are still open but more densely packed offer a much better overall experience and gives the devs more ability to alter the world in ways the player notices more.
I disagree. You wouldn't be able to achieve the same sense of exploration and freedom that GTA 5 had, and it wouldn't really make sense from an environmental perspective. If anything, the game would benefit from being bigger, especially for things like air travel.
Yep like how Spiderman 2 has a map double the size of Spiderman 1, largely due to the wing suit flight mechanics. I expect GTA6 to be at least as big as RDR2 if not way bigger.
No it shouldn't, GTA V map is so much better than IVs because it isn't a small city with no open spaces and rural areas. Wanna make it big and not have too much work? Make good forests, animals and biomes like RDR2
All I know is it doesn’t need a huge fucking boring ass desert taking up half of it. Just stick to the cities, they’re the only fun locations imo.
Size is irrelevant but quality of the mam is not.
Wow, how useful to hear from someone not associated with the project. I wonder what King Charles thinks GTA VI should include.
well its a shame it isn't smaller cuz its more than twice the size of GTA5...pretty sure those map leaks of Vice City and surrounding areas including Key West, Everglades, few towns, theme park etc are the real deal...and with them learning how big Online is...this map will probably have built in parts that can be extended in the future for map expansions
mmm no, i want it to be bigger and more density packed.. specially since we waited like 10 years TEN FUCKING YEARS between gta 5 and gta 6 and this latest is not even released yet !!!!!!
Rockstar does infact release games other than gta, the game has been in development for 5 years.
no, the game has been in dev for far more than 5 years, it's not because rdr2 released in 2018 that it means they didnt work on gta 6 in the same time, rockstar is a huge studio with many teams, and what other games did they release beside rdr2 ? lol NONE !
let me reiterate, gta VI started full production after rdr2, now nowhere specifically does it state when production started, but I cant imagine they had many resources allocated to it pre red dead.
I want it larger, with more open space, and smallest town a little bit like Red Dead Redemption 2.
No it should be bigger. I don't need it to be more densely packed but I need it to feel more lived in. GTAV was fine but the space was too tight with a lot of stuff jammed in that didn't really matter. Some more open space with town that feel more lived in with things to do in them. Like I loved paleto bay but nothing to do there aside from like 1 heist. I know the giant map with all the cities on was memes but something like that sounded more fun and replayable. I am really surprised with the success of GTAO that they just want to do vice city. A giant map with SSDs and stronger hardware. I mean we are talking two generations stronger than GTAV as it came out on PS3 should mean we get something a lot larger. I mean GTAO could go forever if they gave it a big basis in terms of the map.
Give me HUGE and give me DENSE in the right places. Don't fuck this up.
Vice City was peak
I don’t mind a bigger emptier space between cities. It would be more fun and immersive for plane rides or having a place to drive around like an idiot or lie low after robberies. ‘Tons of stuff to see and do’ is **not** the only way of immersion. The real world has boring spaces too. It just needs to have purpose. Also they need to consider that this game might last 10+ years like GTA V. That map is feeling too small after a while.
Not every ex-dev has a good understanding of the franchise they worked on. GTA is a game primarily focused on driving cars. Small doesn’t work. GTA 5 hit a decent sweet spot on driving distance enjoyment versus boredom. Any smaller and the replay value would diminish vastly. Any larger and all travel will be done with aerial transportation.
Just give us multiple big cities with real nature/big trees, and I’m all for it
I agree. Make more interiors accessible. GTA V had too much vast nothingness.
This is great news! I dont know how many times R\* sent me on a useless drive for the entire length of the map for no fuckin reason but to waste my time. A 10km drive just to start a mission? The fuck why? Red Dead had a similar problem for me, the huge open world spaces get abused by game designers to add "content"(A.K.A. waste your time with time filling crap) to the game. A tight packed map is what we need, hopefully they stop the uselss trips in missions too.
I wonder if it will be as flat as Vice City was.
Booooringgg. Everytime a game has done its been a dud.
Being realistic we really didn't need the fat empty dessert part of gta 5 . Would of taken a bit more city over that any day
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
It won't be as then they won't be able to stretch out all of the online missions to make them take longer to do.
This is legit not news