Hi everyone. I'm new here 'n this is my first post.
So which one do you prefer? Having a whole map with all the lands and cities free to cross throughout like other rpg games(eg. WoW), or having individual environments around those certain cities or places, with certain connection points among them (eg waypoints) like DII?
I personally perfer the first one. Having a whole world to travel and search around would be cool. There's just simply more freedom and the feel of world of sanctuary would be more realistic. Especially when the stable outdoor environment has made this very practical. They can build a hugeass world to counter the negative effects brought by the loss of randomness, and also to take over the gigabytes left out by it as well.
But I doubt if it's gonna happen, since Diablo is a very action orientated rpg game so all elements may have to serve to that purpose otherwise they won't be there. Thus the action game elements may sometimes take over some rpg flavour. I hope that would somehow change a lil bit in DIII: make it a kickass action game, but also give a lil more freedom to be in the world. Of course it doens't have to be breakdance moves for the charactors, but hey i think a free world without any loading point would be a good idea:)
Smaller maps broke up into acts please. Makes the game run better. Even WoW has that when you go from Kalimdor -> Eastern Kingdoms -> Outlands etc etc.
Breaking it up into acts works well for a smaller multiplayer game like Diablo.
I would love to be able to view/access an entire world map, but I also want to be able to view the exact area I am in, in detail.
I love the Automap in Diablo. I can see large structures, landmarks, cliffs houses quite clearly.
But I also love how the map works in WOW. If I want to see an area I am not in, I can, but not in much detail unless I have been there before though.
WOW has a fairly decent minimap, but I prefer Diablo's Automap to WOW's minimap.
Though I feel it must be said that BGII has pretty good maps (most of the time). You have a awesome world map. but if you press M (Map) you get a zoomed out version of you current location, somewhat like WOW, but not quite that zoomed.
As you can see from the "map of inside a building", the stairs present in the gameplay shot are clearly visiable, and in great detail. Which is somewhat like the Automap of Diablo. The stairs in the cliffs in act 2 were very visible. It also does much more zoomed out shots of current locations if you are not out side of a building like WOW does.
I really do not know what I am talking about, WOW's minimap the circle thingy up the top is pretty good, but it only shows you a small fraction of your current location, and you cannot zoom out very far if you are outside of a building.
Some sort of weirdo hybrid of Diablo's and WOW's map would work. I think.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
This is another thing that's sacrificing one of the feelings of Diablo 1 and 2 for mechanics. You don't follow your gut anymore and you can't feel accomplishment from finding the next exit because it'll always be in the same direction. This goes along with the whole light radius mechanic of D2 and, even more, D1. You lose the dark, tense, scared feelings of mystery when it's all lit and colorful. You can see everything and you know where everything is after a single playthrough, tossing feelings of discovery in the dumpster after one use.
I'm referring to the now not-so-random outdoor environments for those who are about to 'wtf?' They want us to be able to grasp the world and where we are in it. But I don't want to! It's not as scary that way....
I think a good designer can combine both approaches. The game would have just separate locations, well designed and all. But gamer wouldn't feel that break up, but instead there would be a strong illusion of the smoothness of the world.
An introduction of a world map (a general map of the whole inhabited area) is the first step in that direction, imo. So I guess we can anticipate some illusion of smoothness.
Well, for me, the question really becomes "do I want a really big world with less detail" or "do I want a smaller world with more detail". They can't do both, or at least not in the same timeframe. I choose the smaller world with more detail
I definately want a more detailed environment. I mean what are all those sacrifices for, right? But I can't see why it's not possible for both to exist tho. There're games that have done it so well like ES:oblivion, Sacred and so on.
Ok, maybe not like abusolutely no loading points. The map can be broken down into several sections, but with strong landscape continuations among them, instead of complete separations like DII?
I think a good designer can combine both approaches. The game would have just separate locations, well designed and all. But gamer wouldn't feel that break up, but instead there would be a strong illusion of the smoothness of the world.
An introduction of a world map (a general map of the whole inhabited area) is the first step in that direction, imo. So I guess we can anticipate some illusion of smoothness.
That's exactly what I wanted to say. Thank you Red Panda.:thumbsup:
Diablo is Diablo.
I hate WoW stile "You cant explore the whole map in your life time".
Well, now without randomized outdoor environment, more side quests and locations for them to happen would be needed for replayablity.
Besides, I believe with the nowadays technology and amount of work blizzard puts into the game, details of the world and the size of it won't have to comprimise each other very much. Other games have done both so well, and I can't see why blizzard can't do it.
Since the areas aren't randomized they should be a bit larger and complicated so that you could have different routes from point A to B.
Also the change of acts should be something else than just a cinematic.. you should be able to travel to the next area or something.
Action oriented games tend to have linear kind of map, where there's only one path for players to walk through the map. Kinda like level after level. I don't expect DIII's gonna totally change that, I just hope like u said, there's more options of the pathes, maybe for side quests or treasure finding.
I highly doubt that you will be able to walk between acts on foot, because each act is going to be set in a completely different kind of environment...and transitioning between them could be visually awkward. Therefore, I think we can expect a D2 style transition between acts...with the addition of an in-game world map that shows your position in the world of sanctuary.
Well, for me, the question really becomes "do I want a really big world with less detail" or "do I want a smaller world with more detail". They can't do both, or at least not in the same timeframe. I choose the smaller world with more detail
Id rather just wait for both a large world with lots of detail and no breakdown into acts
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So which one do you prefer? Having a whole map with all the lands and cities free to cross throughout like other rpg games(eg. WoW), or having individual environments around those certain cities or places, with certain connection points among them (eg waypoints) like DII?
I personally perfer the first one. Having a whole world to travel and search around would be cool. There's just simply more freedom and the feel of world of sanctuary would be more realistic. Especially when the stable outdoor environment has made this very practical. They can build a hugeass world to counter the negative effects brought by the loss of randomness, and also to take over the gigabytes left out by it as well.
But I doubt if it's gonna happen, since Diablo is a very action orientated rpg game so all elements may have to serve to that purpose otherwise they won't be there. Thus the action game elements may sometimes take over some rpg flavour. I hope that would somehow change a lil bit in DIII: make it a kickass action game, but also give a lil more freedom to be in the world. Of course it doens't have to be breakdance moves for the charactors, but hey i think a free world without any loading point would be a good idea:)
anyway, nice to meet u guys.
Breaking it up into acts works well for a smaller multiplayer game like Diablo.
I love the Automap in Diablo. I can see large structures, landmarks, cliffs houses quite clearly.
But I also love how the map works in WOW. If I want to see an area I am not in, I can, but not in much detail unless I have been there before though.
WOW has a fairly decent minimap, but I prefer Diablo's Automap to WOW's minimap.
Though I feel it must be said that BGII has pretty good maps (most of the time). You have a awesome world map. but if you press M (Map) you get a zoomed out version of you current location, somewhat like WOW, but not quite that zoomed.
Game Play
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h173/ELF3NLI3D/Gameplay.jpg
Map inside a building
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h173/ELF3NLI3D/Mapinsideabuilding.jpg
Map outside a Building
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h173/ELF3NLI3D/Mapoutside.jpg
World map
http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG2/bg2_map.jpg
As you can see from the "map of inside a building", the stairs present in the gameplay shot are clearly visiable, and in great detail. Which is somewhat like the Automap of Diablo. The stairs in the cliffs in act 2 were very visible. It also does much more zoomed out shots of current locations if you are not out side of a building like WOW does.
I really do not know what I am talking about, WOW's minimap the circle thingy up the top is pretty good, but it only shows you a small fraction of your current location, and you cannot zoom out very far if you are outside of a building.
Some sort of weirdo hybrid of Diablo's and WOW's map would work. I think.
I'm referring to the now not-so-random outdoor environments for those who are about to 'wtf?' They want us to be able to grasp the world and where we are in it. But I don't want to! It's not as scary that way....
An introduction of a world map (a general map of the whole inhabited area) is the first step in that direction, imo. So I guess we can anticipate some illusion of smoothness.
Ok, maybe not like abusolutely no loading points. The map can be broken down into several sections, but with strong landscape continuations among them, instead of complete separations like DII?
Since the areas aren't randomized they should be a bit larger and complicated so that you could have different routes from point A to B.
Also the change of acts should be something else than just a cinematic.. you should be able to travel to the next area or something.
RIP: Demon Hunter: lvl 50 | Barb: lvl 60 (plvl 5) | Monk: lvl12 & lvl70 (plvl 200)
Besides, I believe with the nowadays technology and amount of work blizzard puts into the game, details of the world and the size of it won't have to comprimise each other very much. Other games have done both so well, and I can't see why blizzard can't do it.
Id rather just wait for both a large world with lots of detail and no breakdown into acts