To Be Or Not To Be: The Map

Which does not answer our questions at all...

 

I do not want minimap, I want full sized map, you press the 'm' and your character pulls out a map of area, perhaps with your location marked on it. I think that maps would be quite useful, I also think that only parts of the map visited by yourself should be visible.

I might prefer them to go a bit further, so you could add simple notes and marks on the map (here is entrance to the lair of the red dragon, giant spider valley lies here). Maybe explorers and travellers could then share their maps with other players if they are visiting the area together or something like that.

I think it is not a good idea especially if players can then re-sell their maps, it sounds great but it takes away a lot, most people will buy cheap map of everything and then rush through it without any exploration, I think it is hard to balance this. Also any new cartographer would have hard time finding customers imho.

 

how about a cartography skill where players can explore each scenes and create maps from it with markers and other things that they can sell to players...

 

I'm fairly sure your questions have been seen by the developers. I'd just give it some time; the R5 test was only 3 business days ago.

 

I will agree that the 3D map looks better. But I don't really have a problem with the 2D map at all. I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything and frankly if it's a decision between getting a shiny 3D map and having more game functionality (which it very well might be) then I'm more than happy to have the 2D map going forward.

Also, while I respect everyone's right to an opinion I find it difficult to not be dismissive outrage over a 3D map. But to each their own, please carry on.

 

That answers all the questions but strangely enough it looks that some that do not want to hear the reasons for devs choices.

 

Then please paraphrase those answers for me as I don't seem to get it...

 

why do we need so many threads on overland map?

I am thinking that even with a company release statement, there will still be complaints on the overland map.

 

Maybe for the same reason we obviously need so many threads on the PvP of the game...

 

I actually like the map style. The only thing i think would be impossible is to get the map rotated with the actual style.

If you think more about it, the big difference with the old map are how the objects are presented. No features are lost (except rotation).

 

No-one has asked the company to respond specifically to the very serious concerns the community has about the state of the map, housing and pvp also both day one targets have a huge number of threads so why is complaining (rightly so in my opinion) about the map any different? I feel it is very unfair to start suggesting people are insane when they politely ask for a response.
And for the record I won't be silenced until I get a definitive response about whether this paper map is THE game's map and if so how will they turn this:



Into this:


what an amazing game the above would have been ;-(

RG stated in his 'year anniversary speech' that he would need 'huge amounts of money and a large team to produce a 'civ 5-style map' (the map that he personally promised) well he has had a very large amount of money so with great respect I request that they hire the people they need to produce what is for so many an essential game element and if they won't then I think we need to think about financial reparation.

Look, I have the utmost respect for RG but how on earth with all his experience could he NOT know that the map he originally promised us would cost money and a team consisting of a number of people dedicated to developing said map system.
As a senior editor on Wikipedia one of our core tenets is to 'always presume good faith', but my good faith is getting a mite stretched when I hear him say that he couldn't bring that type of map to the game because of:

A: cost
B: team numbers

Something he would surely would have known from day one yet the company went ahead, produced the video and RG publicly announces a 'civ 5 type map' for funding purposes, where I come from that could be considered trading standards fraud; aka marketing scam; however, for the sake of good faith, my love of Ultima and respect for Lord British I want to politely ask the company to set the record straight

 

See now I know you have misquoted RG. He said a single-scale map would be what takes huge amounts of money and a large team to achieve, not the hex grid map. Edit: that is the dual scale map I mean.

As many have said before, nothing has changed in the functionality of the map, only its aesthetic.

 

That should be reason to post in an existing thread and not start another.

I hate the new map. I disagree with Chris/RG's statement that the old map was bad for immersion and the new paper map is good for immersion.

What RG demoed previously showed wildlife moving on the map. We should see the state of towns. Dragons flew overhead. You could discover a roving band of gypsies with that map. You saw YOUR AVATAR on the map. It looked like your character was interacting with the world. That is immersion.

So I agree with what you're saying, but creating thread after thread doesn't help. It makes people arguing this point seem petulant.

 

I am not so sure about that.

In this video, RG says that the initial goal was to have a map like in the old Ultimas with some activities on it and roaming monsters. Then they changed it to the cloth map. So the inital goal with all of the functionalities for the map could have been scrapped, therefore the term initial goal.

 

For the record, I'm neither happy nor unhappy with the direction taken. I just doesn't make much difference to me.

 

Firstly I just want to clarify that by hex grid map, I meant the current dual scale map.

The change to the cloth map was their decision to stick to one art style for the map, not to change the functionality of the map itself.
There will still be activities and roaming monsters. If that is what this is all about then I think you have been worrying about a non-issue all along.

RG was explaining that a Civ5 style mono-scale map would be too much work for such a small team. Hence the initial goal to use a dual scale map. They then go on to discuss the reasons that they modified the aesthetic from being a cloth overlay on a 3D map to a purely cloth art style.

 

I do not like the aesthetics of the map as the cloth map doesn't create the illusion of walking around in a "real" world.

And I fear that one of the reasons for the change to the cloth style was to not offer all those functionalities anymore and just present a means to travel from hex to hex.

 

I'm sorry you think that of me :-/
This post was a request for a company response to the map issue not a general discussion thread, surely that is obvious?
Also, the pvp and housing threads far outweigh the threads critical of the map yet I don't see you calling those subscribers 'petulant'.

 

First off I'd like to say that I'm glad this argument is at least once again taking place in a thread that started about the map itself. I've seen too many other threads hijacked by this topic even when they started off having nothing to do with it. Please let's just keep our arguments and opinions in threads that start off specifically about the map.

Secondly, from what I noticed, there are only a handful of people that have been extremely vocal and invested in this topic of trying to have the map changed back to the former version. Yet even with that, I have not seen anyone as passionate or vocal about defending the new version of the map. I can easily say that Lord Darkmoon, DNA Cowboy, Sir Isycle and a couple of others (if I missed anyone my apologies) have championed the cause for the original style of overland map but could not give you a single name for who is championing the new style. Most players seem ambivalent and more interested in defending the developers choice than the choice itself. I have not seen anyone say something along the lines of, "I love the new map and hope the old style never comes back, I would be upset if it did."

Third, I am at this point undecided. I would like to see the end result of this new direction by development before I make a decision. What will the final result of this type of map be once everything is implemented. What will it include and what will we be able to do with it? For this reason I am in agreement with DNA Cowboy in that I'd like to have some feedback from the developers on this matter, however I am not 'demanding' it. I do not have the right to do so. My investment was done in faith that the developers on this project, the ones dealing with the issues would know what is involved and determine what is the best course of action to take. I am not going to suddenly doubt them at the first sign that they are not doing something in the way that I envisioned or may have seen before all the facts were available. I think that they have good reasons for going this route but as yet do not have all the answers themselves until they push to see what the limitations are in this direction. I think that once they know, we will know, and that then is when the decision to remain with this map or revert will be made.

Fourth, I want people to think when they post on both sides of the topic. A debate is only a debate and a way of expressing opinions. Although you may be emotionally invested in whichever side you choose, remember that the person that disagrees with you also has that right to do so. Please do not transfer the emotions of the debate to personal attacks. I have seen this in other forums happen all to often. I must admit that so far this has been one of the more civil heated debates that I've seen take place and am proud that everyone has acted accordingly. Let's keep it that way.

 

Another thing, Chris stated that the old 3D map wasn't as immersive because of the scale of the Avatar and animals compared to cities and forests etc.
But if they also want to include those elements on the paper/cloth map, won't the scale be off there, too? I mean if they want to keep in line with the scale of the elements for immersion reasons, how small would the (paper) animals have to be to make it look right?