Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43

Thread: Opinions on World Map thread

  1. #21
    Developer
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    670
    - was unlucky enough to start my most recent game in a grey area.


    Wait, what? The grey area means that the tile is explored (you've seen it at least once) but you don't have any army/city that can see it currently. Do you have a save for that?

  2. #22
    Mage’s Assistant
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    107
    I should clarify that I have no problems with the fog of war concept or execution. What I am complaining about is the palette choice for some areas. First, I don't understand why all plains aren't green (or tan), why all trees aren't green, etc. There are a significant number of different palettes used and I hate the grey one: grey plains, grey trees, grey hills, grey rivers, you get the idea. Now maybe they are supposed to revert/convert to the standard palette when I'm 'there'. But they don't. Currently on a business trip and my companies impregnable firewall - reasonable given what we do - makes playing Steam games impossible. Will send a save when i get home.

  3. #23
    Arcane Candidate
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    8
    I really agree that there are many problems with the world map. I particularly agree that it looks like it is for marketing, not for playability.

    1) the color palettes only confuse and hide the important detail.
    2) All this talk about relative size of units to trees and mountains is foolish. In MoM you had a square tile you moved into a "region" tile. It was the perfect amount of detail. You always knew if you were crossing mountains or rivers, you never "don't see" an enemy unit that is mostly behind a flat topped hill/mountain (really they look like mesas). We need this map for one main purpose, exploration. If we can't see the units and ruins because of the palette than the world map really needs rethinking.

    How hard would it be to go to either:
    1) A minimal detail 3D map, less picturesque and more "map" like. (with symbols and line drawings)
    or
    2) Improve the flat map you have when you zoom out, and provide a permanent setting that allows you to play completely in "2D" map mode.

    Last item, take the map off the 45 degree angle. Boy is that confusing. I am trained as a draftsman and i understand you are going for the perspective view like Civ V uses, but it really does not add value to the game.

    I will look for a thread on the minimap to post comments about that useless thing there.

  4. #24
    Thanks for the feedback David! We're working to improve the game in a number of ways and the world map is certainly in there.

    At the moment the art team is focusing on getting new art assets in-game. Hopefully we'll be able to turn our attention to the world map again in the next few weeks.
    Everybody needs friends! Aaron's Facebook Page

  5. #25
    Archmage of the Outer Ring jamoecw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,047
    if you've ever played hegemony: philip of macedon, that was a nice way to incorporate a world map that looked like a map. as you zoomed out the paper map faded into view. simple and elegant.

  6. #26
    Archmage of the Central Tower Happerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,770
    I know I would have preferred a simple 2d map like in MoM to the horrid looking 3d one we have currently.
    The Wiki.

  7. #27
    Keep in mind that not everyone thinks it looks horrible. Plus we're going to try to give you a quasi-2D equivalent.
    Everybody needs friends! Aaron's Facebook Page

  8. #28
    Arcane Candidate
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    8
    OK I won't say it looks horrible, but it does clutter the view, and it really does not add to the gameplay. I will state that I felt the same what when Civ went to the "3d" view. At least their maps were clearer, nothing hiding behind mountains or trees or such.

    The graphics of themselves are very nice, and clearly you all spent a good deal of time on the appearance. I am not trying to know the work you have done. I just don't think we need that level of graphics in this genre of game.

  9. #29
    Mage of the Inner Tower Endless Rain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    RPG.net
    Posts
    532
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
    Keep in mind that not everyone thinks it looks horrible. Plus we're going to try to give you a quasi-2D equivalent.
    Thank you so much! I've always liked 2D graphics better than 3D in most games, except in genres that benefit from using 3D, which I don't think strategy games do. Is it going to look like the pre-alpha mountains screenshot? I really liked that style, and was sad when they changed it.

  10. #30
    Archmage of the Outer Ring jamoecw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,047
    3D graphics tend give more bang for the buck when doing animations and such, but they are definitely not as simple to do well as 2D are (not that 2D are simple). originally this game was going to be 2D, but that kickstarter failed (i never knew about it until after the fact). 3D artists that are used to doing first person stuff need to learn about the little stuff for static 2D maps done in 3D (like pulling off mountains that look like mountains even if they are rather flat). i don't expect what we have now to look like the final build as the artists are probably still learning stuff.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
footer