That map doesn’t have realistic proportions. There’s no way a street in Burnout could be as big as a highway in San Andreas.
And that map is missing a lot of games too.
No one said the roads were the same size, it’s showing the area of the game worlds.
It was common practice to make the worlds seem bigger by making everything smaller. It was the only way to have a game as big as San Andreas on a ram limited console like the PS2.
A HL1 mod in particular used that technique rather well. In HL Rally, in order to have big tracks that seemed to break the limited GoldSrc map size, they made all the car models and scenery props smaller than what would be usual in a normal HL1 mod, that way they were able to trick players into thinking the maps were bigger than the average.
That’s the reason why the seemingly huge San Andreas has an actual map area that is smaller than many modern games with smaller playable areas. It’s all about the clever use of tricks.
Never knew that. That’s pretty cool.
Just wondering, where would Skyrim be in that chart?
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-04-20-tesv-skyrim-level-cap-explained
Edit: There’s a post on Reddit saying it’s around 26 miles squared.
Thanks! Wow, really? That makes it look so small, yet it takes me forever to go from one end of the map to the other… :fffuuu:
Probably because it takes forever to go 26 miles (or even more if you go diagonal) in real life walking.
If you go for 26 miles at an average speed of 4mph… it takes you 6 hours 30 minutes. Right?
Don’t forget to count the mountains and stuff that you have to avoid and go around to reach the other side in Skyrim, giants scare the crap out of me. that makes it take a longer time than you think. I have walked across the map and it doesn’t take much time(excluding the stuff I mentioned)
Hey guys, remember when GTA III was considered huge?
They really should have measured the maps in proportion to actual in game size to account for the miniaturizing used in San Andreas, though. In any case, because of the limitations of the hardware, I ran into a lot of issues where if there was a lot things going on in the environment, finding a car was next to impossible. The riots at the end of the game were a perfect example. Course they could rationalize that away because of the scenario, but I have a feeling it was due to the lack of ram.
In related news: https://games.ign.com/articles/121/1215948p1.html
I always figured that, but never knew whether or not it was true.
Well if Microsoft does announce something BIG this year (or next year) Sony will have to also act by announcing something BIG
I fail to see how that’s at all relevant to what we’re talking about here.
Also if the average walking speed is 4 mph then I walk fast as hell
Also, MS’s claims about avatar level graphics intrigues me. There has to have been a dev team or two working their asses off on something as big as what that would imply… surely something like that could slip through some cracks easily.
Unless they’re just bullshitting and have no idea what they’re talking about 
.
I could see Naughty Dog or Crytek getting fairly close to that on the next generation of hardware but I doubt it will as powerful as we wish.
Well actually now that I think about how far the 360 has come on it’s limited 512MB of RAM, I kinda think that the new one should have only like 2GB. This will force the devs to make the game alot more optimized and mabe even help optimize the PC version which would mean happy faces all around. Also I kind of think ARMA COULD be on Xbox with a limited RAM, It’s just up to them if they want to take the time to optimize their game and fit it on the console, again this could also help PC gamers that are struggling with game performance sitting on 2x gfx cards and like 8GB of RAM with an unoptimized game.
Also, I think that the Avatar-like gfx thing can work, the best way for ATi and nVidia to test out new powerful GPUs that may have more power than 2x of their current latest and greatest is to put it on consoles so that they can see how it will work on a large scale.
If they stuck the new console with a more conventional architecture all around, ports would be easier, too. Didn’t the 360 have a triple-core processor or some weird shit like that?
The 360 uses a triple core PowerPC cpu.
Yes, the same PowerPC architecture used in the old Mac computers. In fact, at one point, the 360 dev kit was simply a custom made Apple Power Mac G5 or something like that.