Do you guys think the classic, overhead, FF world map is outdated?

#91MysteryVeilPosted 6/27/2013 6:18:10 AM
Na, nothing it really outdated if you can make it work well with whatever type of game you're making. If it suits, it can still feel fresh and exciting, while still providing a little bit of Nostalgia. :)
---
Disgaea 3 Platinum...100% to goal!
One year anniversary! MysteryVeil and eixeeee. October 27, 2012.
#92rapius002Posted 6/27/2013 7:37:00 AM
DTM847 posted...
Firstly...The argument that a seamless 3d representation of the world can somehow express the same size as a world map.
Just a straight up lie.

There is NO WAY you can build that much 3d landscape without dumbing down the quality of the world dramatically. We can look at EVERY FF that doesn't have a world map for precedence.

So because they haven't done it yet it can't be done? Based on what little we know about FFXV, that's exactly what they are going for.

World maps give the world size and detail (through player imagination) on a scale that you simply can not EVER have in a seamless 3d environment. The reason for this is simply man-hours required to add detail.

If my imagination has to fill in the size and details, then the world map didn't do it. That's like handing you a blank sheet of paper and saying "Use your imagination, that is art". Also, again you say it can't be done, and to that I say it just hasn't been done yet.


It is virtually impossible to create a living, breathing world in full 3D exploration type worlds like Xenoblade or FFXII. There is just too much detail to fill in. You'd need like every game developer in the world to have it so you could fully explore every bit of terrain for 7 continents,.multiple sub-continents, island chains, different environment types. Plus, to give that feeling that everything is open world and explorable, you'd have to break down all.invisible walls. No more mountains you can't climb. No more oceans you can't cross. No more objects in the distance you can never reach. And that's just the surface world. You'd have to have tons of dungeons, every house able to fully explore. A gargantuan amount of NPCs. An insane amount of creature variation.

At least for me. Otherwise, it's almost better to leave things up to the imagination with a world map.
#93rapius002Posted 6/27/2013 8:34:27 AM
DTM847 posted...
Firstly...The argument that a seamless 3d representation of the world can somehow express the same size as a world map.
Just a straight up lie.

There is NO WAY you can build that much 3d landscape without dumbing down the quality of the world dramatically. We can look at EVERY FF that doesn't have a world map for precedence.

So because they haven't done it yet it can't be done? Based on what little we know about FFXV, that's exactly what they are going for.

World maps give the world size and detail (through player imagination) on a scale that you simply can not EVER have in a seamless 3d environment. The reason for this is simply man-hours required to add detail.

If my imagination has to fill in the size and details, then the world map didn't do it. That's like handing you a blank sheet of paper and saying "Use your imagination, that is art". Also, again you say it can't be done, and to that I say it just hasn't been done yet.


It is virtually impossible to create a living, breathing world in full 3D exploration type worlds like Xenoblade or FFXII. There is just too much detail to fill in. You'd need like every game developer in the world to have it so you could fully explore every bit of terrain for 7 continents,.multiple sub-continents, island chains, different environment types. Plus, to give that feeling that everything is open world and explorable, you'd have to break down all.invisible walls. No more mountains you can't climb. No more oceans you can't cross. No more objects in the distance you can never reach. And that's just the surface world. You'd have to have tons of dungeons, every house able to fully explore. A gargantuan amount of NPCs. An insane amount of creature variation.

At least for me. Otherwise, it's almost better to leave things up to the imagination with a world map.
#94DTM847Posted 7/1/2013 6:49:24 AM
It's worth noting that I mentioned multiple times that I believe the world map as it was presented in games like FF1-9 is outdated. I'm not saying the mechanic itself is worthless but it needs to evolve with the times. It makes the world feel small and empty since most RPGs only have a handful of cities, and of those many times a "town" is comprised of less than 5-10 buildings. On one hand I don't want to have to walk around a realistic-sized town like in Assassin's Creed; I was wishing for more fast travel points in Colony 9. Maybe the key is to get rid of the idea that there is a dichotomy of TOWN vs. FIELD when in fact it should just be the WORLD. Why do "monsters" only decide to waltz into towns when some story event necessitates it? (Epiphany: maybe there are so few towns because of the friggin' monsters roaming the entire world). But why have monsters anyway? They almost never have any direct relationship with the plot. Their only purpose is to give you something to hold "O" and kill while walking from one town to another. Ok I've just completely changed the subject - sorry!

I've also said that something like FFT or SMRPG where the "world map" is literally a map is fine - it tells me we are looking at a map and deciding where to go, and I get to skip the monotony of actually traveling there.

In closing, one thing that I will miss is that between games like FF7, Wild ARMs and Chrono Trigger the world map themes are some of the best pieces of video game music in existence.
---
PSN ID: Danimals847 | Steam ID: Danimals847
#95FreshSushiPosted 7/1/2013 7:06:29 AM
World maps are lazy
---
Dark Souls 2
Don't screw it up From
#96XenilPosted 7/1/2013 7:25:28 AM
Yes, I think it is outdated now. I was replaying VII recently and three things strike me about the old way (VII-IX in particular):

1 - The world maps are actually very bare and there's not a whole lot of reason to explore them for the majority of the game. The only time it is worthwhile to explore is when you can visit numerous locations and unearth some the secrets of the game, each game lets you do this at earlier points (like VIII Disc 1 before Galbadia) but as a whole there isn't much to do until Disc 3-ish, pre-last dungeon.

2 - The old games are very linear with or without the world map. Typical structure goes: Town A > World Map (Nothing much to see) > Town B - Story scenes > World Map (Optional Town / Location without much to do) > Town C - Story Scenes > World Map (Nothing much to see) etc. Considering that the pre-rendered dungeons are also very linear (Especially in VII) I'm kinda at a loss why FFX was criticized for being linear when it essentially just follows the same structure without the world map but I guess that's another point entirely.

3 - The world maps themselves aren't actually that interesting, they're not really the type of place you'd want to keep traversing for long periods of time. More things would have to be added to make it work.

I think there's potential with the old model but it depends on the scale and art direction really. With the current graphics and character models they use an overhead world map wouldn't work as well. I'm curious how they'll do it in XV if it has a world map.
#97MetalKeiyaPosted 7/1/2013 7:52:10 AM
My answer is: it depends. The reason why the classic world map existed in JRPG's was because it was an easy shorthand to portay a 'big world' for consoles that didn't have enough processing power and capabilities to portray the world as such. There are notable exceptions (Pokemon from the Red and Green, for example), but now that we have stronger, bigger, more capable consoles, developers don't need to do that shorthand anymore. Or at least, not like they used to (Star Ocean and FInal Fantasy XII, for example, are one big map that is separated by zoning in). So one part of it is that developers are getting ambitious about creating a large, seamless world. Given what we have in other franchises, such as Azeroth and Skyrim, worlds can only get bigger and more detailed. But not necessarily better, as the lack of people running around will essentially make gigantic, expansive worlds the offline equivalent of an MMORPG.

The other thing you need to take into account is the amount of suspension of disbelief from your audience, aka the 'realistic' rule. Ni no Kuni can get away with it because Ni no Kuni is a Ghibli anime: it already demanded a lot of suspension of disbelief to begin with. But with FFXV? I'd actually be surprised if they threw an old-fashioned world map in there.

But, hey, nothing confirmed until we see it, right?
---
By reading this post, I have just killed off one of your brain cells.
#98IcyFlamez96(Topic Creator)Posted 7/1/2013 8:31:05 AM
co1onel posted...
IcyFlamez96 posted...
co1onel posted...
Prove it


no u


Common knowledge doesn't need to be proven. And I asked you first.


Wait..... I think that means I win
---
If ya na'mean
Ratchet and Clank movie.... YESSSS
#99DTM847Posted 7/2/2013 4:29:26 AM
Thanks Xenil and MetalKeiya. It's good to know I'm not the only person with this opinion who is also able to present a rational reason for having it.
---
PSN ID: Danimals847 | Steam ID: Danimals847
#100AndrogyneTechPosted 7/2/2013 4:49:08 AM
It is outdated if you have a better alternative.

Final Fantasy X didn't have a better alternative. Tales of Symphonia knew that not having an overworld wouldn't be a good idea. And so didn't do away with it. And thus Tales of Symphonia was a far less cramped game than Final Fantasy X.

The only reason to abandon the whole abstract "world map" where you enter towns based upon things like that, is if you can have a truly massive world where nothing is left abstract. That isn't very easy unless you want to spend loads of money and create and entire explorable world for every game where nothing is left to abstraction.

Unless your game is small and exploring the world is a bad idea, a world map is pretty much always going to be the best option because it simply makes too much development time to make an entire world like that. The only cheap way to get rid of the overworld and still keep the world in a fashion where you can explore the entire world, would be to have a lot of copy and paste textures.

Which might be preferable to a overworld. But even then you'd need something like an overworld for flying to different parts of the map anyway if you got an airship. Really, anything is better than the method of removing most of the globe to explore like Final Fantasy started doing. About the only cases where removing the overworld is a good idea is in cases like Xenoblade Chronicles, where the immediate world to explore is so massive that it makes up for a lack of overworld.