| 27 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
Scrounging around various places looking for more info about The Secret World got me to thinking about world size. More specifically how big is big enough. Or, how tiny is too tiny.
WoW came to mind in the too big category. The game world is huge, and since it is divided more or less into lvl specific territories, it is over-all empty with pockets of population. Seems like a vast waste of space.
Do others think that WoW is too massive, or other game worlds in general? |
|
|
4/06/12 7:09:49 PM#2
Yes. An example is Runes of Magic: It has 2 divided continents (and will get a third with the next chapter). It gets every chapter 3 or 4 highend areas + new starter areas. And atm its loosing big parts of its playerbase. When is a game world to massive in my opinion: In general you can say, the world is too massive, if you dont meet many other players in the same area. This can have different reasons, one is, that the world is divided in different continents/plantes/etc. and the important areas are all on one continent (/etc.). Another reason is, that there are many divided areas. If you have one new big area (f.e. for level 50-60), youll meet players there, who are doing completely different quests fo different levels. If you have smaller divided areas (f.e. for level 50-52, 52-55, 55-57, 57-60) youll only meet the players, who are on the same level as you. Greets Niffi |
|
|
4/06/12 7:11:22 PM#3
Originally posted by xZeRGz Nah, honestly I think WoW's size is just about right. I do, however, think a game world can be too big for its own good. I think in part that's what did Fallen Earth in. Granted, there was a lot that led to FE's downfall, but the sheer size of the world and the lack of any fast travel emphasized the 'single player' aspect of the game. If I was in S3 and a clanmate needed help in S1... Forget it. It'd take me thirty or forty minutes to get there even on a motorcycle, and as long to get back. Even now, with the fast travel options they added, it's an issue, both because it's limited and, especially if you factor in towing, expensive. |
|
|
4/06/12 7:12:00 PM#4
Population of players and mobs contributes to the density "feel".
I have a limit of about 6,000 total per zone in WAC. I've been experimenting with smaller zones to keep density up. |
|
|
4/06/12 7:12:47 PM#5
No
"i don't waste my time building relationship in games" - nariusseldon |
|
|
Cuathon
Advanced Member
Joined: 10/24/04
Draw Something is now an MMO. God has forsaken us. |
4/06/12 7:16:03 PM#6
If the world is too large its probably because they don't run 30k+ players in one server like EvE does. |
|
4/06/12 7:16:07 PM#7
|
|
|
4/06/12 7:20:30 PM#8
I don't find WoW massive because each zone is pretty densely populated by things. It's more of a question of whether that extra space is useful or simply terrain for more spawns. Play for fun. Play to win. Play for perfection. Play with friends. Play in another world. Why do you play? |
|
|
4/06/12 8:04:41 PM#9
Short answer: no. Long answer: I haven't seen a mmorpg setup that was too large. |
|
|
4/06/12 8:12:18 PM#10
Yes, games can absolutely be too large. I mean, you could make a game world that's much larger than Earth itself, but what about the content? You've gotta be able to flesh out all of those areas and create enough content so players don't feel like they're wandering around in a lifeless world. Basically, there's really no rule on what's too large for a game, but you have to make sure it's within your capability, budget and time to properly flesh it out. |
|
|
Loktofeit
Elite Member
Joined: 1/13/10
EVE in 2013 - DUST 514, CSM8, Fanfest, 10th Anniversary, Uprising, Odyssey. Gonna be a good year :) |
4/06/12 8:18:54 PM#11
Originally posted by ActionMMORPG Player and content concentration combined with methods of travel dictate the world size far more than map size. If a game world has too few players or sparse content, it's too big no matter what size the map is. filmoret: One thing I have never figured out is why the game devs hardly ever fix simple problems that arise. It is like they don't care about the pvp community. Nitth: What makes you so sure its a simple fix? filmoret: Because most of them are. Sometimes its just changing a number in a code string other times its creating a few variables. However none of them should take over a few hours of coding. |
|
4/06/12 9:27:11 PM#12
Im not sure I have seen one that is too large, but I could envision it.......I really dont like quests much as it is, and if they involve alot of running that really makes it worse....A huge world with alot of quests would most likely suck pretty bad. |
|
|
4/06/12 11:35:17 PM#13
I think a game world can only be too massive depending on a few factors. One being themepark vs sandbox, skill based system vs level system. For instance: -if you have a huge world and only 1000 users, it can feel pretty darn lonely. Especially if that world doesn't encourage exploring! -if an area is level specific and everyone has reached the top tier the other zones are left barren I think Ultima Online did it right. It wasn't level specific. I mean, you wouldn't go fight dragons right after joining in the game, but every area had at least something you could do. I found the skills based system of 700 points to distribute encouraged people to be all over the place for various reasons. However, when the population started dwindling after trammel (damn you trammies, damn you all to hell!), thats when you realised that any game can become TOO big. They effectively doubled the world size (and added more later on too). So all in all, yes it can be too massive for various reasons. I still prefer the larger worlds regardless. |
|
|
4/06/12 11:41:30 PM#14
Originally posted by Loktofeit
I agree on travel. Morrowind world is quite small by todays standards, but walking is soooo slow that it takes forever to travel and feels large. |
|
|
GeezerGamer
Advanced Member
Joined: 4/03/12
Who ever said "Familiarity breeds contempt" didn't have an internet connection. |
4/06/12 11:47:41 PM#15
Originally posted by xZeRGz Worlds do seem to be shrinking. And there is a reason for this. These new high end graphics come at a cost. The cost is what it takes to render. So the more figures that require rendering and the more randomness the more difficult it is. This is why higher populated areas have lower FPS in games lately. Tthe easiest way to counter the problem is to separate toons off through zoning and instancing and smaller worlds like Rift. I think Rift could be larger to be honest. WoW is not too big at all. In fact it's not even that big compared to earlier ones. Go take a look at Anarchy Online. Or if you rememebr SWG. If the conversation turned "Tit-for-Tat", and I've stopped posting, Consider it your win. |
|
4/06/12 11:55:30 PM#16
It is never big enough. If you are making a world for thousands of players instead of a theme park then areas need to be massive. |
|
|
4/07/12 1:55:32 AM#17
It depends on the population of the game. WoW's size, when considering a high population in a PvP context was just right. Too cramped in an open PvP server isnt always good. Once the playerbase begins decreasing, WoWs world will be bigger than needed. If you dont have any type of fast travel I think you need to be alot more careful how vast the world is. I remember the original EQ and the following few expansions. Everything was a run. Decisions to do anything involving large geographical changes were time consuming. As much as it immersed me into the world then, I just would not have the time for that now. When I am playing these days, I do not want to be forced to spend it just "getting" somewhere. At the same time, sometimes in some games, just looking around is enticing all in its own.
|
|
|
4/07/12 6:14:34 AM#18
Embers Of Caerus is going to have a big world...they talk about one continent below, there will be 4 altogether: EoC - To carry on with the feature list: Massive, seamless persistent world. I think Rob may have spoken about that but I can't remember if he gave you any numbers. It's a big world. It's massively big. Our world builders have got their work cut out just filling it with stuff. A good comparison size-wise is games like Just Cause, Just Cause Two and Three. They're pretty big. They are big game worlds but there you're looking somewhere in the region of 256 sq miles which is pretty big. But then our first continent, we're look at a size of (not including the oceans) 3,800 sq kms. |
|
|
4/07/12 3:46:15 PM#19
Originally posted by GeezerGamer I agree with you in just total size. AO has a massive world, but most areas seem pretty empty. You end up running a long way, before you get to do fast travel, doing nothing but fighting a few random mobs along the way. It's not packed with content, it's just empty, open space. Compare that to, say, Skyrim, which has a much smaller "world", but is positively packed solid with content. You can hardly walk 50 yards without tripping over something different to do. It's not really about gross size, but about density of content that makes a world good or bad. Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more |
|
|
4/07/12 3:49:42 PM#20
no.
even if 80% of the world is unused or rarely travelled the simple knowledge that it's there adds to the feeling of openness and freedom. |
|