Check how much resources does it take to run Utah or the West coast maps and then compare the size of those to the gta map and then check if you have a NASA supercomputer under your desk.
It's possible, but; 1. Legal issues would come into play massively, Rockstart and Take-Two have a metal pole shoved so far up their ass about legalities that the pole itself straightened those fat incel's backs out. 2. All the trees, grass, and just how enormous the map itself is would basically cook any computer that didn't belong to fucking NASA.
we DO have maps that are a LOT more massive than GTA V right now. But obviously, they aren't at the same quality level of the smaller official maps, and when you go over 4kmx4km you start having point zero issues with the map and it starts to look odd. But the main performance killer would be the amount of models and textures that it would need to render. Besides, didn't i hear there was a cap limit on objects a map can have in Torque 3D before it crashes? Or so i heard from the "generic city" map maker.
You can go around of that problem, but then amount of ram is another thing, editor keeps crashing a lot with 16GB ram and when putting more than 60 000 or so objects on map. Issue with textures etc. is that engine can put only about 3000-4000 drawcalls out on most machines and you have to fit everything on sight to that. Now this is more generic stuff than any specific reply to anyone. However you can bog down even 8086k with about 3000 drawcalls, because not each call is equal, you can put lot of heavy calls using many textures and low amount of polygons for each separate object, or you can combine some objects and textures as well as use game engine's batching of meshes to your advantage like in case of JRI. Case of WCUSA is showing very well how game engine's batching abilities were not possible to utilize more, so to help CPU to chew stuff for GPU, larger objects were used as modern GPUs can chew 10 000 000 polys just fine, yet CPUs are still at same what there was 5 years ago. It is possible to build bigger city than WCUSA, hugely bigger actually, but it will always be a compromise of something, using batchable objects without textures will help a LOT, but you like to look solid colors instead of textures much? With some good optimization I could make many times bigger city like this, there would be no problem at all, but there would be 'few' compromises: It really comes to what map maker then wants to achieve, if on high details you could run a map with gtx1080 and better only, that would allow quite big city, for example from WCUSA if we remove forest, race track etc. re-use same objects few times more that city could cover whole map size of WCUSA. One question I don't have answer is if we can use tileable resources feature of DX11 somehow, that would allow much improvements as you could set one gigantic texture for all the buildings without hogging all VRAM or much any hogging actually, 8K textures or more with performance of 2K or less of texture size. Just don't know if engine can do that and if it can, how to use that feature, but it has been possible in DX11 for years. Anyway problem then really becomes to similar as in WCUSA, to run it at full details at 60fps you need something like gtx1070, but also faster than AMD as they did tap on GPU resource just enough to make it run on fast Intel and you really need a FAST Intel (highly overclocked K series from 6th, preferably 7th gen or newer) to run that map especially if wanting to use more than 1 car as cars do use drawcalls and drawcalls use one core of the CPU, which then means many cores does nothing while one is screaming death. AMD and NVIDIA then, I have been told that it is different story between them, NVIDIA having more threading done to their driver, personally I don't have any idea about that, but what I have read it would be something like using large combined objects etc. makes use more threads on green team gpu than on red team gpu, is it true, I have no idea, haven't tested red team GPU at recent times. So what you want to do in that city? Drive alone? Drive with more than 1 vehicle? Use train with wagons? Now that then again requires some choices to be made for map design as well as methods used to make the map, more cars you want to be possible to run on map, more GPU resource you have to tap on. Compromises, you can't have it all, but you can have almost everything of something, there are ways, but it results compromises, always. Future, who knows what will happen, but very likely map builder can choose between to build much bigger, prettier or run more cars than now is possible, but compromises will still be there, one has to choose which compromise he makes when building map. Culling might improve and that would help to limit needed drawcalls of visible scene as less invisible stuff would hog drawcalls, which would help with single core CPU issue stemming from drawcalls that stems from number of different objects and how many textures those use etc.
Its a real shame that its another case of the game being limited by the map making tool or Torque3D....... Again.
I'm not 100% sure on what I'm about to say, but didn't someone once on here have the GTA V map in BeamNG? I remember there was a post from someone that complained the map wasn't to scale
The focus of that map was just the airport. for purposes of flying around, the rest of the map was there, just very low poly.
