MapHaven't played

Six named regions is more than any GTA has had and that number is doing work

III had one city. Vice City had one city and two islands. San Andreas had three cities and the countryside between them, which is the closest comparison. IV had one city. V had a city and a county.

This has six named regions, each with its own official description and its own character. That is a structural decision, not a marketing one. Naming a region commits you to making it feel different from the others, and six is a lot of different to commit to.

San Andreas is the only precedent and that game is twenty two years old.

keysrunner_887w ago

6 replies

portgellhorn_5w agoHaven't played

Late to this and delighted by the tourism board reference. Yes. Somebody has to do it.

keysrunner_887w agoHaven't played

Which is exactly why I keep going on about the Keys and why the tourism board over there keeps going on about Port Gellhorn. Somebody has to be in the corner of the ones without skylines.

justhereforonline7w agoHaven't played

six regions is also six sets of activities and six lots of map to fill. thats where games this size usually fall over

vicebeachcam7w agoHaven't played

Naming a region commits you to making it feel different is the key sentence. Every named region is a promise and they made six of them.

codeinabox7w agoHaven't played

San Andreas being the only precedent is worth sitting with. That game was three cities and it was also famously uneven, because making three cities feel distinct is enormously hard.

tulipdriver7w agoHaven't played

Uneven is right. Las Venturas was thin compared to Los Santos and everyone knew it at the time. The risk with six is that two of them are thin and those two are the ones nobody defends.

Sign in to reply

Set how far you have played and join the thread.