GTA V Map: Not So Big After All?

Can it really be bigger than GTA IV, San Andreas and Red Dead Redemption combined? We found out.

Posted by
Maps from GTAs V, IV and San Andreas
Maps from GTAs V, IV and San Andreas
All Images (2) »
Someone leaked a GTA V map from a strategy guide and the entire gaming world has gone ga-ga. Comparisons have been made with other GTA titles but from what we've seen all those comps have been to say the least, unrealistic. So we commissioned a proper one.

We got our map guy to compare the GTA V with that of San Andreas. We did this because, hell, the new title from what we've seen in all the trailers and lead-in marketing returns us to those halcyon West Coast days before GTA IV's rather more dour approach in the East Coast.

So, our man comped the maps and visually matched them using key features. He warned us, "San Andreas has a pretty rectangular land mass, but as GTAV's island is not you can't just grab a ruler to compare the area of the two... but", and here comes the but, "using Photoshop's select tool on the land mass and running a pixel count, I'm coming up with numbers that show GTA V to be around 220% bigger. It's boundary is around a fifth wider and over twice as tall. On a scale or one to massive, I'd say it's f***ing huge."

This is fascinating stuff, especially if you believe such august organs as The Independent newspaper which states that, "Rockstar has previously said that Los Santos the fictional setting of GTA 5 and a parody of Los Angeles will be bigger than the game worlds of GTA IV, GTA: San Andreas and Red Dead Redemption combined." That stat' was in fact referring to the GameInformer splash from August.

"Looking at these two maps", our map man continues, "I just can't see this being possible. There's a stink of "Let's chuck that stat out there and see if it floats" about it. I say this because is appears to state as 'factoid' that GTA IV and RDR together must be only a little larger than the San Andreas map."

With that, he comped in the GTA IV map and concluded "GTA V is 133% bigger than the three islands of IV. This soundbite in nonsense."

He clarified that, "now in both cases I used a scale based on 'real world' features such as city blocks and similar freeway interchanges. They're obviously not feet & inches, and not all city blocks are equal, but they're key features that give the game world its scale."

So, "f*cking huge" just not as f*cking huge as the early hype and follow-up comps would have you believe.

Unless of course, a whole new area or set of areas that haven't been leaked yet! For example, the fact there's no inclusion of the faux San francisco or Las vegas could make a section that you get to by air a total possibility, as it was in San Andreas - you had to fly to Liberty City to carry out a mission.

Update: Well, some of you have indicated that you've got some problems with the scale comparison provided here. I, can see your point. I've asked the map makers and they've told me that, "at the time of creating the comparison I wasn't privy to the info that apparently the GTAV map doesn't show minor roads, and we matches scale using roads and intersections as comparable features."

Comments

Showing the 20 most recent comments. Read all 31.
Matt 13 Sep 2013 02:56
12/31
This is so inaccurate. Gta sa was a 13.9 square mike map while gta v is a 49 square mile map. Do the math it's about 350% bigger, not 220%
Matt 13 Sep 2013 03:01
13/31
This is so inaccurate. Gta sa was a 13.9 square mile map while gta v is a 49 square mile map. Do the math it's about 350% bigger, not 220%
more comments below our sponsor's message
Tim Smith 13 Sep 2013 09:43
14/31
Well, some of you have indicated that you've got some problems with the scale comparison provided here. I, can see your point. I've asked the map makers and they've told me that, "at the time of creating the comparison we weren't privy to the info that apparently the GTAV map doesn't show minor roads, and we matches scale using roads and intersections as comparable features."

There's actually more to this story than I can talk about here, but for now, apologies for the scale problems.
AMy11lool 13 Sep 2013 18:33
15/31
Did it not occur to the "map makers" that the runway at Francis International Airport from GTA IV is almost twice as long as the runway at Fort Zancudo and the runways at Los Santos airport in their comparison picture.
Dominik 14 Sep 2013 17:37
16/31
GTA IV bigger than SA? Ridiculous.
maximus 16 Sep 2013 04:23
17/31
This website just went full f**king retard
And my award for new worst gaming site goes to... 16 Sep 2013 04:25
18/31
SPONG! Congratulations!
MATHew 18 Sep 2013 23:27
19/31
Just as a side note... Matt, if you're gonna start using terms like 'do the math' you probably should do the math yourself. 49sq miles divided by 13.9 = roughly 3.5.
That doesn't mean it's 350% bigger though. Just like 20 isn't 200% bigger than 10. It's only 100% bigger. So using actual maths, the articles statement that 49sq m is 220% bigger is more accurate than your assumption of 350%
By the way I still think this article is rubbish and wasn't going to waste my time commenting. But it's people like you that mishear telecommercials stats that piss me off
This guy ^^^ 20 Sep 2013 00:45
20/31
@MATHew Oh my god you are dumb. That math is wrong. F**kin dumbass
Anonymous 20 Sep 2013 00:55
21/31
@MATHew
3.5 = 350%.
fuck 9 Oct 2013 10:44
22/31
this pricks are stupid heaters san andreas bigger than iv
gtav 25 Oct 2013 10:21
23/31
they said gta v map is 27.5 squre miles this article is made by haters
go back to play super mario you dump
IJMA leader RS 28 Oct 2013 15:38
24/31
I can't believe how stupid this guy is
ummm 6 Nov 2013 12:05
25/31
i agree with you too
guess 6 Nov 2013 12:22
26/31
i'm sure it's a big map but one city make its looks small and most of map are mountains and field
Greg 9 Nov 2013 22:41
27/31
@Matt
Technically, hes closer to right than you. its about 250% 'bigger'. Your right if you said 350% 'the size' of GTA SA, but not 350% 'bigger' than GTA SA. Its a technicality in the wording, for example if it was 100% bigger, then it'd be doubled (13.9+13.9=27.8). So your 350% 'bigger' is 13.9x3.5+13.9=62.55
Greg 9 Nov 2013 22:46
28/31
@Matt
Technically, hes closer to right than you. its about 250% 'bigger'. Your right if you said 350% 'the size' of GTA SA, but not 350% 'bigger' than GTA SA. Its a technicality in the wording, for example if it was 100% bigger, then it'd be doubled (13.9+13.9=27.8). So your 350% 'bigger' is 13.9x3.5+13.9=62.55
Greg 9 Nov 2013 22:53
29/31
This guy ^^^ wrote:
@MATHew Oh my god you are dumb. That math is wrong. F**kin dumbass


how is the math wrong? it is 350% THE SIZE of GTA SA, but not 350% BIGGER than GTA SA.
Greg 10 Nov 2013 01:13
30/31
This is the measurements off the map that came with GTA 5. In the bottom left hand corner there is a key with a measurement scale in both feet and meters. I measured it with a ruler and 1 mile=8.8cm. The map is 44.5cm wide and 70.4cm tall. So 5.06miles wide by 8miles tall. This comes out to be 40.48 square miles. And this includes the large amount of surrounding oceans. Rough measurements of the size land including Alamo Sea (I really broke it down and put a lot of work in to get as accurate as possible) came out to be 22.258 square miles (again this is not including any surrounding ocean, only land, seas, lakes, and rivers)
Math Genius 10 Nov 2013 02:04
31/31
@Matt
Your wrong Matt. Its approx 275.7% bigger. It is 350% the size of san andreas. So fellow genius, by your logic, 50% bigger of something would be smaller!
Posting of new comments is now locked for this page.