In the cRPGs The most loved for me is the FREEDOM and free chose! More freedom means more joy and adventures.

The teem just start to structure the world, let show them what we would like to see.

 

Quote:

"The size and structure of the world - This game will be... large. And it will have two big cities, exploration areas, and a 15-level mega-dungeon. Ensuring that the world is planned properly requires examination of what has worked for us in the past and what hasn't. The original Baldur's Gate had a number of wilderness areas, but low density of content in many of those areas. Baldur's Gate II had much greater content density, but fewer wilderness/pure exploration areas. We'd like to make sure we have pure exploration areas while still maintaining good content density."

 

I think such areas are perfect exploration tool for lot of the gamers, you can put in some of them small quests, hidden places, objects and treasures and something more it can be randomly (you know whay) I think it is quite easy to be done and I hope to see it in the game.

 

I have suggestions to the developers:

If you need some help in creating such environment or whatever you need, you can make a special thread with specific tasks. I think here in the forum have a lot specialists in different ares who want to be a part from the project.

Edited October 24, 201213 yr by Mazhlekov

This poll doesn't allow different opinions than black and white ... I'd go with the balanced way, although I really enjoyed the density in BG2.

I liked the way BG2 handled things for the most part, but later in the game areas felt too artificial. I'd rather have a balanced mix of BG1 and BG2 for most areas and a version of Athkatla populated by Sigil refugees for cities.

 

This poll is rather lacking in the meaning that we get to choose between more variety or no variety. I like tortles.

This poll is rather lacking in the meaning that we get to choose between more variety or no variety. I like tortles.

100 areas are much beter than 25 (like in BG2). If you dont want to explore OK leave the area or don't go there. Through the quests and dialogs you will find the important one and will be able to focus on them. In BG had lot of exploration and I loved this game much more than BG2.

The Pool is OK. The choses are clear, stick to the story (like in BG2) or the story + lot of exploring (like BG and even more). The rich and complexive world is more interesting, and I'm shure, for allmost everyone RPG fan.

Obsidian will have to decide...

This poll is rather lacking in the meaning that we get to choose between more variety or no variety. I like tortles.

100 areas are much beter than 25 (like in BG2). If you dont want to explore OK leave the area or don't go there. Through the quests and dialogs you will find the important one and will be able to focus on them. In BG had lot of exploration and I loved this game much more than BG2.

The Pool is OK. The choses are clear, stick to the story (like in BG2) or the story + lot of exploring (like BG and even more). The rich and complexive world is more interesting, and I'm shure, for allmost everyone RPG fan.

Obsidian will have to decide...

 

Well it's true that Obsidian has to decide, but you can't start a poll with seriousness, not allowing more differentiated opinions. Those 80% are probably not a true opinion on the exact meaning of the sentence, but on the general trend.

Also, "Yes" means something different than "I love to explore" in the meaning of the question. Exploring for instance doesn't exclude a high density, if it is well done. And still, the question asks for the existence of exploration areas, not for the whole games trend, which you seem to deduce.

 

All I can read out of this poll is, that people love if a game has single or more areas that focus on exploration. Not that people love games which focus on exploration areas. Please restart this poll with a good and differentiated pool of answers, maybe even give the possibility to pick more than one answer.

 

Edit: By the way, there is a different poll, asking for the general trend:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61928-low-content-density-vs-greater-density-of-content/

As shown, the middle seems to be the answer. And maybe the middle also means, that we get both: High density cities, villages, areas, and also low density exploration areas.

Edited October 24, 201213 yr by JallaAllah

Different dimensions and planes like Planescape Torment!

One of my favorite things about BG was the open wilderness I could explore, please bring this back to gaming.

 

And I have to add, it's very cool that the best at making RPG's has turned away from the big names and turned to the folks that truly appreciate them to make the next legendary RPG!

I just hope they don't feel like they need to stock every little nook and cranny of a wilderness area with something to do. That just feels very unrealistic.

I would love to have a lot of places for exploration, but they don't need to be empty ones!

I go for "high density exploration areas"!

Bad poll. I would go for the middle option, like most people posting. Not tons of wandering through empty wilderness, but still a fair amount of exploration and discovery as opposed to a small handful of locations.

Including a number of freely explorable low-content areas would, IMO, greatly enhance the game. One of the defining features of RPG's (or at least, what should be a defining feature) is the ability to choose how you play the game. This, IMHO, not only should this include freedom in character progression and the presence of side quests but also a large degree of freedom in exploring less central locations in the game world. Especially when a developper wants to define their game in large part by the world they have developed, including low-content areas is an excellent way to make the world feel more alive instead of just being a framework for the plot. The first Fallout and Baldur's Gate are good examples of games which used a freely explorable world to great effect.

This thread was first, but it sadly has much less activity and fewer poll respondents. Let's shift discussion over to here.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61928-low-content-density-vs-greater-density-of-content/