Have you never played an rpg? cause thats what this game has been marketed as all along..Originally Posted by raptor_i Go to original post
Thank you for helping people who have not played the Alpha understand the size of the described map. It seems the Alpha was about 15-20% of the now assumed to be released map.Originally Posted by Stavros Flatery Go to original post
But if it took some players 3 days to visit that portion, and about 7-8 minutes to cross it, how long do you think it will take for many of us to explore 100% of it? I would say 3-4 weeks at the very most. You will forever remember, no matter how many free or paying DLC comes out, how small the starting portion of the game was, everything that was missing and I strongly believe it will take a lot away from the game. I so hated the comparison with Destiny and was looking forward to a nice area to explore from the start, at least a couple hundred of hours of exploration before I would have to start doing the same missions over and over again. If I want to jump into a vehicle, to another vehicle and go straight to the raid entrance, I'll keep playing Destiny.
I would rather have suffered the "walk everywhere" than the walk nowhere. I know it is not always a lot of fun, but it would have definitely helped with game immersion, crossing all that wasteland they so carefully modeled for us. With the fast travel in between headquarters, it really makes no sense to say that you "downsized a map so that players did not have to walk". Maybe we should stay at our HQ and teleport directly to our raid spawn every time (directly in front of the group we have to eliminate), avoid everything in between, 0 walking, 0 difficulty, 0 immersion, 100 grinding. This approach seems to be at the complete opposite of what was originally promised.
I understand the density will have an impact. But the shear size is always beneficial to open world oriented games, even if part of the open land is mostly vacant (it just adds to the atmosphere). From playing Vanilla WoW, I can say that I always enjoyed that feeling of vast and unexplored land, the fact it could take hours to cross a continent from top to bottom. Expansions were welcome additions. (I'm not comparing TD to WoW, simply stating the fact that a large open world contributes to the game immersion).
To me and many others, the map is too small to provide longevity to the game. From the video stream, I'm guessing that the sentence "pretty much" means there might be, from the beginning, some small content to play outside of the map. But it is just not enough if you want to keep the community interested for a couple of months (assuming a DLC would come out that quickly without delays, which is not the track record on this game). We supported Ubisoft and followed the game development for years, I will be extremely disappointed if all we get for a map is what we are seeing now, no matter how many DLC we are promised. Like I said before, you have only one chance at making that good impression.
Is it too much to ask that all of Manhattan and the upper west corner of Brooklyn be part of the game since the release?
Why are you even comparing this game to WoW, FFXIV and EVE? This game is not similar to them. This is an open world third-person shooter role-playing video game with survival elements, whilst it does take very small elements from MMO's though realistically it's not even in the same echelon as them. This game would never work with subscribers, just the thought of it would put off a heck of a % of the fan base.Originally Posted by deekay_zero Go to original post