Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'density'.
Found 1 result
Does anyone else think the encounter/point of interest density is too high for the maps? There also seems to be very clear "zones" to maps, which can often make the maps feel artificial and constructed. For example in Dyrford Crossing: The map is practically divided into 4 quarters, each with it's own group of wildlife. There are also 3 points of interest/dungeons on the map. To top it all off, the map is quite small. It really makes it feel like you're stumbling over encounters at every step, and that the "ecosystem" is designed and artificial. The terrain is also artificial - there are rivers and cliffs perfectly placed to funnel the player and maximise every square inch of space and seperate "zones". It reminds me of one of those exploration missions in Starcraft where the map funnels the player down a maze to maximise the distance the player needed to travel within the confines of a square map. In Baldur's Gate I loved the feeling of exploring each of the vast maps and of not quite knowing where the encounters would be. IMO the spread of encounters and content in that game was fantastic. Which brings us to another point - I sincerely hope there are much larger maps in the full game. Within those I hope that there's more constraint in placing points of interest and encounters. Hopefully this is just a beta thing and map density has been increased for the purposes of giving players a lot to play. Thoughts?