Not a big fan of the HEX system overhead map

But they have also said they want them to be small, 3-30 minute experiences, not like expansive instances from other games.

I think a mixture is best. Sometimes players have lots of time to play, and sometimes they don't.

For outdoor areas, generally larger would be better. Imagine WoW but without the seamless connections between areas. Instead, it'd be connected more like EQ, with zoning between scenes. If they do that and drop the dual-scale map, I believe that'd bring in interest from far more players and still be cheaper to develop than the seamless world. They could have their cake and eat it too.

Remember, any time you make a design choice that will bring in more players, you actually increase the budget, so it offsets the true cost.

 

Well...tell me how you really feel.

I don't care if you have a different opinion then me. But don't deem to think you speak for the majority or for anyone else.

You don't have to like what I post but it is an extremely ignorant view to somehow think you add more then anyone esle to a topic. The reason I posted what I did was because you talk down in your responses to people, hence the reaction you are getting.

 

Apart from selling out the founder kickstarter pledges we also had changing the rule of 1 plot per account and dumping the overhead map completely.

So founder status became a stretch goal- sellout as many backers you can before April 7th 2014 and get a $25 bounty for doing it.
Selling the VERY limited land plot in the game became a stretch goal - by selling then in the add on shop with a buy as many as you want per account.
And must remember this was all tied in with a RG & DS fencing extravaganza.

If the first year of the game hadn't been spent designing house's and catering for the few with money to burn the overhead map may have been working now.

What's the latest stretch goal cross your fingers and hope it sells

 

Try to stop answering the fan boys/girls mate, they come in small packs to create the image you are the troll. If you raise a valid concern its their way of losing it in the thread, then they call in the guards to close the thread.

 

Perhaps it isn't the message people take exception with, it's the delivery. It isn't a discussion if someone derides the others opinions when they give reasons for their beliefs or try to make them look bad by calling them names.

There is a reason they went with the 2 layer map here...we have gone over it a lot in this thread.

It's not because we are out to snow slide another poster, it is just the way it is.

I see a lot of potential with the system if they get the uper layer of the map right and make enough tiles to make it actually interesting to explore them. This is a pretty tall order but in some ways it is a lot less of an objective then a huge expanse of empty areas. Especailly if they want to make areas flagged for single player interaction(to go along with the story).

Also, this map system gives them a lot of room for dynamic events that cran spring up anywhere on the map. This would even be more interesting if they got crowd sourcing in on this to get some player events happening....like a tournament in ahex that can easily be added to the map that can be temporary and doesn't effect the whole world map.

I also see events that can be put in place dependant on time and date. When you are dealing with a continous map you have issues with changing areas like this on the fly.

What I would like to see is the eventual ability to travel to the next hex by going to the edge...give the player the option to load the next hex or the world map.

OFF TOPIC: What I would really like to see on these forums is a return to talking with basic human respect. I'm not saying I'm innocent and that I never get worked up with something I feel strongly in but there has lately been a lot of agression on here that honestly makes it uncomfortable to have a conversation. It could be just me but I see it after every release more often then not.

 

I think a lot of people, including me, could get behind that notion, but I dont know if that's possible technology wise. My understanding is that its not a case of the world being nicely sliced into hexes, but rather each hex is completely independent and unrelated, meaning not only are some hexes bigger, some smaller, but moreover the edge of one has no relation to the adjacent edge of the next one. In other words you could find yourselves leaving a hex with a mountain to one side, a field to another, and enter the next hex with a statue to one side and a barn on the other. I dont know, but I THINK it would take a massive amount of work for them to retool every scene they've done to make sure it "meshes" with adjacent ones (I get the impression that while we havent been privy to it, the mainland is already fleshed out somewhat...)

 

One of the things I find interesting about the hex system is that the area/instance you enter into could be as large or small as they need it to be. For my part, and I'm sure others will disagree with me, but to put it into UO context, I see each hex almost like the old moongate that brought us to each of the different facets, only here each hex is a different facet. If the developers want they could generate a map 10 times the size of trammel and link it to a hex and when you entered you could run for miles all over the place but if they serve no purpose then why go through all the trouble to do so? The point is, the real world terrain that we get to explore in each hex can be as large or as small as they need it to be. Combined the total world map of these instances will dwarf anything we've ever had before in UO. Also the world seems small now because we are running around a tiny test island with only about 8 different hex types to explore of small to medium size. This will change.

What we need is not the single layer but a better transition in and out of the two layers. Instead of running off the map, maybe make it so that the avatar can only pull a map from their pack when in an area that is safe and they are not being attacked using a hotkey for quick access (except in dungeons, quest areas, etc.). Then use the map itself as a means of transitioning from real world to overland realities. Example, player pulls map from pack and looks at it, the view zooms in to the point where we are seeing our miniature selves on the overland map. We move to where we need to go, or explore, etc.. like this and then as we enter a new area, we see ourselves zooming out again and putting the map away. This would be a lot less destructive to immersion and still allow for both layers to exist. if an avatar runs out of a hex zone as they do now then have the same animation take place. Avatar stops running, map comes out and player transitions to overland map layer.

This is just a thought. I'm sure there are others but instead of saying that the developers should scrap the work they've already done and change the course they've already chosen, let's take that choice and suggest ways to improve it, make it more seamless and immersive.

 

They don't really have to jive to be honest...just have the player shown walking into the scene....it would the equivalent of him walking aways into the area....no different then moving a long the map just not using the map. It isn't really a huge deal.

Think of it like you would when watching a tv show...you know they are going to a mall for instance but you don't see every step to the mall you see them at the mall.

 

I totally agree with you Sunsanvil and some hexes are supposed to be only a subset of what would be in that area and so would not truly represent the entirety of the hex but rather only the portion that the player would need to see.

As to lining everything up so that the avatars could travel hex to hex, that would be a time consuming task to say the least. Who knows though what the future holds though because, with the ability to change and or swap out hexed instances as needed, this could be a project that is undertaken in a future release. Right now though for the first release with so much of the game mechanics still not in place, there are more pressing concerns to be dealt with.


EDIT: (Added)
rune_74 does have an interesting idea though...

 

I do see where you are coming from (no pun intended), but for my part if I'm going to get a loading progress bar and be whisked away to an "uncorresponding" view, might as well just take me to the map.

But really, if it were hypothetically possible I'd suggest we adjourn and meet back here after R7 when we (hopefully) will get a first look at not a new map, but a 2nd scale of gameplay! Could very well be a game changer (again, pardon the pun).

 

You are basically asking for a world map that you can explore. Everyone says its a big map with 1000's of hex's a lot of instances to load .

Well this map is exactly like a TV show every few minutes you have a commercial break in the story while you watch the adverts (overland map). So why not a full world map they could add new dungeons world areas anytime anywhere just add an instance on the fly.
All MMO's add content instances on the fly. They are called DLC's some free with larger one you pay, I'm sure that's the marketing stance for SotA as well. Maybe backers will get all new content free others will have to pay for it.

 

Not so much asking as getting (like it or not). Per Starr:

​

Here are our goals for the overworld map for Episode 1:​

​

Zoomed out 3D version of the world​

3D Avatar animating and walking around in the overworld​

3D NPCs animating and moving around the overworld​

Roving encounters that you can see moving around the overworld. If you intersect with them you are pulled into a scene.​

Surprise encounters that pull you into a scene.​

Indicators on map of world state including towns under siege, PVP encounters, etc.​

Terrain Types determine movement speed​

Party members visible on overworld (both moving around and indicators of which hex they have entered)​

Obscurance of unexplored areas (i.e. fog of war or something like that)​

The manifestation of which we have yet to see of course but it SOUNDS like much less of a map and more of a 2nd scale of gameplay to me....

 

In UO i use my extensive runelibrary (ALL interesting spots are marked).
I never ran from one end to the other.
In SotA i use the map.
Whats the big difference?

I like Ravenclaws idea as an addition:

 

That's what we had before they scrapped it for the popup book map. They couldn't dedicate any time to making it work so what's changed have they put creating House styles & shop items on the backburner.

 

That's not really what I meant. I was talking dynamic instances...things that can change on the map not static DLC extended content. Things like a merchants caravan could be in one hex at a certain time then another later. It's not the overall adding to the game I'm talking about. It's the ease of ability to change things on the map without it being a full blown expansion.

Adding a volcanoe for instance is easy in this setup....any hex can be changed to that instance...easily. Now, if it was going to be afull open map you would actually have to regenerate that map. Now, you are just regenerating that one hex...I'm sure they have other ideas of events like this...seiges and things a long that event.

Imagine they could actually easily do a marching army with a camp that moves a long the map over time...to give the impression this army is actually moving.


I think we need to get beyond the well they can add static expansions and look at how this is for dynamic content.

You are focused on the logistics of it all...say that going to the map is like a comercial break. But, with the push to the 3d map and more added functionality it should be another layer of interaction to be honest.

 

The big difference is the choice to explore. We all used runes in UO but not before we had explored all the world on foot/horse.

 

You can have travelling NPC in an open world hardly dynamic ground breaking stuff in 2014

 

Having a traveling NPC in an open world is not exactly ground breaking either. Not exactly sure what point you are trying to make here. Please elaborate.

I think rune_74 has a good suggestion, 'ground-breaking' or otherwise. It would be an interesting addition to the current system.

 

http://1000damage.wordpress.com/2013/05/27/top-20-ideal-mmo-features-of-2013/

List of most requested features for an MMO.

Vast, open world to explore with no instancing, no loading screens. - This is the most requested feature.


The rest of the list this game hits on most of it.

I just don't get this desire for a vast open world. I don't like them. They are boring to me. I decided to look up games that are good open worlds:

http://theplayvault.com/wp/2011/06/20/the-10-best-open-world-game-environments-ever/

I've played every game on that list and I don't like any of their worlds. The world feels boring too me, not enough variety, not enough changing. I guess I just don't like vast open worlds. I like vast worlds with enclosed systems to give me variety. -Everybody hates loading times. I hope the dev's find a way to minimize loading times. But with the info we need to have loaded I don't think there will be any way around it.


Also, I doubt you'll see a new MMO like that.

Instances are actually fun. I have no idea why people don't like them. Instances are what give you challenges whether it limits you to 1 character or 100 characters, but keeping the player counts to a challenging level is Ideal.

How much fun would it have been in WoW if every dungeon/raid you tried to do there were 1,000 other players in there doing them.


I think that's the problem with listening to players, players think they know what they want, but if you gave it to them they would say it was poorly implemented. They'll never admit what they are asking for simply isn't fun.

 

When you come into a thread and all you post is a derogatory remark (as you have done several times now), don't act surprised when someone calls you out on it.

Instead of getting upset at other people's opinions and posting your vitriol to the forums, why not try and offer up your own point of view on the subject they were discussing in the first place.