Openworld, or node-based world? : Fallout: New Vegas

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:47 am

Your greedy?

No, wanting several maps as large as Fallout 3 or NV is greedy, sufficing to ask for an open world that is 3 times bigger as an expectation, it is foolhardy.

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:55 pm

No, wanting several maps as large as Fallout 3 or NV is greedy, sufficing to ask for an open world that is 3 times bigger as an expectation, it is foolhardy.

Ah i see.

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 10:12 pm

No, wanting several maps as large as Fallout 3 or NV is greedy, sufficing to ask for an open world that is 3 times bigger as an expectation, it is foolhardy.

OK the playable area in fo nv are not the same as fo3. You can play the center of the map only fot the most part. Fortification hill is a map node. I though I d be able to go across the river and fight more cl.

Fo3 you could go almost everywhere in that map.

To say DC was small is out there. All the Dupont areas the Georgetown areas count as DC as well. In comparison look at Los Vegas.......... Where is it? I have no feeling of being in Los Vegas at all. It feels more like Mountaineer gaming resort on the Ohio/West Virgina border to me.

Bethesda put me in DC. Fo nv failed to do that, and I did not like that. Map nodes would be even worse. I like running and going where I want, when I want, and how I want. Map nodes would destroy the thing Bethesda does best.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:48 am

This is how I feel as well, although I would say there there actually can be both.

The node system would be for traveling between locations, while the sandbox part would be for while you're in one of them. I'm sure some folks would complain that that's not really sandboxing, but then you can't please all the people all of the time.

Perhaps the single biggest benefit of node-system travel is the ability to have endless opportunities for random encounters during one's journeys while not clogging up the fixed locations in the process. You wouldn't be able to walk directly from location to location, but a node system allows for truly massive world maps with tons of locations, so you wouldn't really miss much in the exchange.

Agreed.

I can see only benefits in a system like that, when compared to a -- usually crammed -- sandbox map.

Map nodes would destroy the thing Bethesda does best.

Nah, if anything, they'd allow Beth to really shine in what they do best because they could put their creativity in full work when making different areas without the constraints of one single areas geography, and have less worries about scalind down and getting all the stuff from Todds "big bag of cool" to fit in a manner that would actually make sense in the setting.

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 10:38 pm

Setting your standards a tad high I see.

You know what they say about the greedy...

ok I ll take 6 or 7 the size of HH/PL, but nothing less, and Bethesda has to do them.

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:53 pm

ok I ll take 6 or 7 the size of HH/PL, but nothing less, and Bethesda has to do them.

We were actually thinking more along the line of 8-12, with randomly generated random encounters and specifically placed dungeons, bunkers, and bases for special encounters, but whatever floats your boat.

OK the playable area in fo nv are not the same as fo3.

Yes it is.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:57 am

ok I ll take 6 or 7 the size of HH/PL, but nothing less, and Bethesda has to do them.

That'll be 50 bucks. We're short on change, so please use even amount.

Personally, I don't really care about the exact amount of the nodes -- or even the individual sizes -- as long as they amount to a decent game overall. I could go with far less, but that is -- I guess -- a bit more realistic expectation. So... agreed.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:53 am

We were actually thinking more along the line of 8-12, with randomly generated random encounters and specifically placed dungeons, bunkers, and bases for special encounters, but whatever floats your boat.

Yes it is.

8-12 HH/PL sized map nodes? sign me up as long as Bethesda does them.

No they are not

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:38 pm

8-12 HH/PL sized map nodes? sign me up as long as Bethesda does them.

No they are not

And we're the biased ones.

Yes they are, the maps are not the same size, the map is bigger vertically and shorter horizontally, but they are nearly the same size in playable area.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:07 am

That's what we've been suggesting, a node based map with HH-sized sandbox nodes, but people see "node" and automatically assume wanting to throw out sandbox completely.

How much "HH-sized" areas would cover the FNV area?

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:55 pm

How much "HH-sized" areas would cover the FNV area?

Not sure, I don't know the exact size of HH, but, like PL, they are of substantial size and have an acceptable amount of exploration to please people, to be coupled with the aforementioned system for special encounters as well.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:39 am

Well i like both, but with the node system i just dont want to go from new york to chicago or something like that. more like what fallout 3 and New Vegas did, go to areas that are close to them. like have one base area then other areas that are nearby like national parks, government facilities and cities.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:14 am

That's what we've been suggesting, a node based map with HH-sized sandbox nodes, but people see "node" and automatically assume wanting to throw out sandbox completely.

What happen to open worldish nodes? That's right, you got Mass Effect and Dragon Age 2! 'nough said

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 6:02 am

Not sure, I don't know the exact size of HH, but, like PL, they are of substantial size and have an acceptable amount of exploration to please people, to be coupled with the aforementioned system for special encounters as well.

I just tested this, it takes 59mins to FT from the Southern Passage to the Sorrows Camp, one minute less than it takes to get from The Mojave Outpost to Nipton. I think that makes HH about 1/20th of the size of the Mojave.

I really hope the developers aren't going to make a map broken up in 20 parts, accessed by loading screens with progress bars that look like something moving over a map, just to give some players the illusion of a really big map.

Or perhaps they could add just two extra nodes, completely white environments with nothing but a couple of signs marking the north and south poles, then it would be the biggest map ever.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:06 am

A great big fat NO to nodes.

edit: Hell, I'll say it again just for good measure. NO!

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:01 am

The nodes do not need, or even should be equal in individual sizes.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:00 am

The thing I hate with open world games is that they put a lot of strain on the system and are prone to more bugs than a summer evening.

Node system is relatively easier to manage from a developer's aspect. Plus there's no time or resources spent on filling the gaps between towns or significant places. That extra time & resource goes into putting more details into the already existing areas or more testing.

On the gaming side, node system allows for a way larger game world. You can compare New Vegas map to Van Buren map if you like. A larger world allows different settings (deserts, beaches, ruins, snowy mountains etc.) without breaking immersion (like take a step and it starts snowing). Plus the random encounter feature gets easier to implement.

So, down with the open worlds.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 12:04 am

Honestly, I wouldn't mind a mixture of both. :confused: I loved the Node-Based aspect of FO1 and FO2, and love the Open-World aspect of FO3 and FNV.

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 9:04 pm

Yes, I think the mixture would be great. I'd also suggest we have randomly generated wasteland encounter zones so we don't get the same encounter map more than once.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:52 am

Node based would break the immersion of Fallout.Having a sandbox map the size of morrowind would be good,not too big as to be bare,not too small to be crammed.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 7:53 am

I'm just going to copy and paste what I typed out in another thread.

I don't find full open worlds immersive at all. First of all there's time compression, a full day in Fallout 3/NV is over in thirty minutes of real time. Then there's the huge chunks of land that are cut out between real life locations. In the real world, Olney is twenty miles north of DC which is a pretty large distance, yet in Fallout 3 it's only a five minute walk up the road.

I don't think either system is inherently better, both have their strengths and weaknesses. However I think the map node system is better for a post apocalyptic world based on ours because it can practically simulate realistic distances and time progression. From a setting standpoint it also makes more sense, we're supposed to be traveling through wastelands after all, and a wasteland is a big and empty place. In Fallout 1/2 the protagonist could travel for days in the wasteland without encountering anything, and for the player this time passed in a matter of seconds. Fallout 1/2 managed to simulate an actual wasteland without boring the player because of the node system. Neither the Capital Wasteland or the Mojave felt like true wastelands because you were tripping over things to shoot and loot every couple of minutes.

Both Fallout 3 and New Vegas' DLC essentially use a node system already. Unfortunately it's not as well realized as the system in Fallout 1/2 because travel between the CW/MW to the DLC nodes is instantaneous and there's never the possibility of any friendly or hostile encounters along the way.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 2:22 am

Node based would break the immersion of Fallout.Having a sandbox map the size of morrowind would be good,not too big as to be bare,not too small to be crammed.

It was in the original games, and trust me, you can easily immerse yourself and lose track of time with those. You have to try it before you say that it breaks immersion.

» Thu Jun 30, 2011 8:35 pm

It was in the original games, and trust me, you can easily immerse yourself and lose track of time with those. You have to try it before you say that it breaks immersion.

I have played both one and two. I never liked the node system because it ruined immersion.I Think a morrowind sized map would be suitable as long as they dont try an area thats too big like they did with NV and 3.focus on the citys and their suburbs,outskirts,industial zones...etc.FO3 made a good attempt with DC but it was ruined by it being sectioned off.IF fallout 4 is set in,lets say NY,i would not mind the entire map being manhatten island as long as I got to walk up and down it all I wanted.

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 10:46 am

Played the originals and the traveling was fine, though just about everything else was boring. However, since some of the best games I've ever played are open-world, I'll allow my bias to speak for itself. :wink_smile:

» Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:56 am

I have played both one and two. I never liked the node system because it ruined immersion.I Think a morrowind sized map would be suitable as long as they dont try an area thats too big like they did with NV and 3.focus on the citys and their suburbs,outskirts,industial zones...etc.FO3 made a good attempt with DC but it was ruined by it being sectioned off.IF fallout 4 is set in,lets say NY,i would not mind the entire map being manhatten island as long as I got to walk up and down it all I wanted.

That's just about the opposite of what I want. Ignoring the node system, I really don't want the geographical coverage to be any less than New Vegas was. The whole aspect of traveling as a wastelander would be ruined if you just walked around a small area like Manhattan. Still, don't DLCs ruin immersion then? You go through a loading screen to a new area, and it doesn't even show you the distance you are travelling like map nodes do. Would you be more up for it if the map nodes were downplayed and there is more time spent exploring/questing in a sandbox map and the map nodes just handle the in-between travel? For example, there are four main cities, each completely fleshed out and taking up the entire map. You spend the bulk of the time in those cities, and there are random encounters and stuff there. In addition to those main areas, there are 4 areas that are wilderness that you can travel to, around the size of HH or PL. Unlike Fallout 1 and 2, where the map node system is your main method of travel, you are spending a lot of time in the nodes themselves and the node travelling serves as an in-between sort of thing.