Their entire game is based around folks being able to get together to defend against rifts. If the population is spread out, that makes it much more difficult. Warcraft is huge as a world, but I can go to Dalaran, Netherstorm or Wetlands and any given time and see only a handful of actual players. A smaller world with action and community is better than a huge empty world, just ask Mortal Online.
//////Stamp of Approval\\\\\\
Your post so nailed it. There can always be extra servers if the population is to big for the current area. But if you make it too big, you will have massive wasted space with empty nothingness like Mortal Online had. You could literally run or horseback for long distances in MO and not see a single soul.
Too many of you are thinking too small (pun intended), the tiny world doesnt necessarily have to refer to actual land size in the game...
Rather the feel of a tiny world. Morrowind for example was a game with smaller land mass than its sequel, Oblivion, yet it felt much larger.
It also can include, and does, the design of the world. Buildings are tiny, the faction cities are a couple of buildings. WoW's capital cities make Rift's faction cities look like a one bedroom studio apartment.
Too many of you are thinking too small (pun intended), the tiny world doesnt necessarily have to refer to actual land size in the game...
Rather the feel of a tiny world. Morrowind for example was a game with smaller land mass than its sequel, Oblivion, yet it felt much larger.
It also can include, and does, the design of the world. Buildings are tiny, the faction cities are a couple of buildings. WoW's capital cities make Rift's faction cities look like a one bedroom studio apartment.
Land mass is moot.
K....... I've played both betas and yeah it's really small and doesn't make you feel like it's big either.
Too many of you are thinking too small (pun intended), the tiny world doesnt necessarily have to refer to actual land size in the game...
Rather the feel of a tiny world. Morrowind for example was a game with smaller land mass than its sequel, Oblivion, yet it felt much larger.
It also can include, and does, the design of the world. Buildings are tiny, the faction cities are a couple of buildings. WoW's capital cities make Rift's faction cities look like a one bedroom studio apartment.
Land mass is moot.
That's actually a very good point. As said, perception can be subjective, but that doesn't mean it can't be specified.
The comparison between Morrowind and Oblivion for example, can you specify what it was exactly that gave Morrowind more the feeling of vastness than Oblivion for you, like specific details and examples?
As for the buildings, I agree, a handful of buildings doesn't make a city. Also, flooding an area with mobs with no or too few quiet spots as counterpoint can make an area feel cramped and claustrophobic.
Keep in mind though, that only a small portion of the entire available locations was accessible, the screenshots of the other areas also show wide open areas. That's why I trust hard figures often more than subjective feelings and perceptions.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Their entire game is based around folks being able to get together to defend against rifts. If the population is spread out, that makes it much more difficult. Warcraft is huge as a world, but I can go to Dalaran, Netherstorm or Wetlands and any given time and see only a handful of actual players. A smaller world with action and community is better than a huge empty world, just ask Mortal Online.
If defending against rifts really matters in this game, people will travel even long distances to fight the elementals. On the other hand, if these rifts indeed are only glorified PQs from WAR, no-one gives a crap if there's phase 1 or phase 5 going on.
//////Stamp of Approval\\\\\\
Your post so nailed it. There can always be extra servers if the population is to big for the current area. But if you make it too big, you will have massive wasted space with empty nothingness like Mortal Online had. You could literally run or horseback for long distances in MO and not see a single soul.
So it makes sense that outside city gates is packed of wolves, bears and dragons, etc..? I thought you had to go into the wild to even have a chance to see one of those creatures. You see, this is the problem of these 'modern MMOs' - they feel too much like a game and too little like a fantasy world. And on top of that, they are too easy even for kids.
Too many of you are thinking too small (pun intended), the tiny world doesnt necessarily have to refer to actual land size in the game...
Rather the feel of a tiny world. Morrowind for example was a game with smaller land mass than its sequel, Oblivion, yet it felt much larger.
It also can include, and does, the design of the world. Buildings are tiny, the faction cities are a couple of buildings. WoW's capital cities make Rift's faction cities look like a one bedroom studio apartment.
Land mass is moot.
The comparison between Morrowind and Oblivion for example, can you specify what it was exactly that gave Morrowind more the feeling of vastness than Oblivion for you, like specific details and examples?
Keep in mind though, that only a small portion of the entire available locations was accessible, the screenshots of the other areas also show wide open areas. That's why I trust hard figures often more than subjective feelings and perceptions.
Easily. Layout, large buildigs on varying heights. The developers made it so you cant just walk in a straight line from one side to the other. There were cliffs and rocks, there was a lot of variety in land shape while enemies were not clumped in a predictable or illdesigned manner. It was unpredictable. You create the illusion of larger size by breaking up the quick point A to point B flow.
Oblivion was the exact opposite. There was a lack of variety, open landmass, and every few steps was the same stock dungeon. If you were at one dungeon entrance, you could see 3 or 4 more from that spot.
A lot of it really doesnt come down to subjective feelings, since there are known rules and patterns in level design. There exists academic theory and study on the subject. Just as a magic trick wont change how one sees it, it is still just the illusion of magic. Knowing the same means of illusion is important for designers.
It is even more difficult when players are accustomed large scale design properties. Large cities, even if half the background in them is merely a 2D image of buildings, buildings you can enter, moving npcs...ect
A lot of it really doesnt come down to subjective feelings, since there are known rules and patterns in level design. There exists academic theory and study on the subject. Just as a magic trick wont change how one sees it, it is still just the illusion of magic. Knowing the same means of illusion is important for designers.
It is even more difficult when players are accustomed large scale design properties. Large cities, even if half the background in them is merely a 2D image of buildings, buildings you can enter, moving npcs...ect
Hmmm, while I'm aware that there are rules to and studies about level design or architectural design in general, that doesn't relate 1 on 1 to people's perception or subjective feeling about it.
Take for example Rift's size: when you would do a poll about it or even following the posts, then you'll not see a clearly defined choice where people say 'Rift is small' or 'Rift is large'. While presumably according to theory and implementing design rules, it should be clear which game environment should feel larger to everyone and which smaller compared to other MMORPG's. Polls and posts would prove that it's nothing that clear.
Hence the subjective opinions: that someone feels an environment is small, doesn't mean it is small, and if someone feels an area is small (or large), doesn't mean another person cannot feels that same area to be large (or small).
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
A lot of it really doesnt come down to subjective feelings, since there are known rules and patterns in level design. There exists academic theory and study on the subject. Just as a magic trick wont change how one sees it, it is still just the illusion of magic. Knowing the same means of illusion is important for designers.
It is even more difficult when players are accustomed large scale design properties. Large cities, even if half the background in them is merely a 2D image of buildings, buildings you can enter, moving npcs...ect
Hmmm, while I'm aware that there are rules to and studies about level design or architectural design in general, that doesn't relate 1 on 1 to people's perception or subjective feeling about it.
Take for example Rift's size: when you would do a poll about it or even following the posts, then you'll not see a clearly defined choice where people say 'Rift is small' or 'Rift is large'. While presumably according to theory and implementing design rules, it should be clear which game environment should feel larger to everyone and which smaller compared to other MMORPG's. Polls and posts would prove that it's nothing that clear.
Hence the subjective opinions: that someone feels an environment is small, doesn't mean it is small, and if someone feels an area is small (or large), doesn't mean another person cannot feels that same area to be large (or small).
Is the above image only made up of boxes without any curved lines?
Which center line is longer?
Which one has the larger dot in the center?
I dont think its subjective to say that you saw, just as everyone else sees, 1) curved lines in the first image even though there are none, 2) the line on the left is longer when in fact they are the same length, and 3) that the dot on the right is smaller even though they are exactly the same in size.
My point is simply this, there are rules to optical illusions and for manipulating perception, they are not as subjective as you think, rather knowing what makes the effect work.... good level designers can do the same thing.
I've actually seen these pictures and others like it many times, so I look differently at them.
Hey mate, if you want to provide justification why how you feel about the size of the area you've been in is like it is, it's all good.
But as I said before, how you feel isn't how everyone feels about the size, and when you drag how people feel about the size of the world into the discussion, then it's still subjective. You can't say that it's wrong for those other people to feel the game world is large, just as it can't be said that it's wrong if you feel that the game world is small. After all, it's all people's personal opinions.
However, the actual physical size of the canvas they've used for the gameworld, that is what can be determined by testing, and that can actually be compared to that of other game worlds. How people actually feel about each game world, that's up to them.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I've actually seen these pictures and others like it many times, so I look differently at them.
Hey mate, if you want to provide justification why how you feel about the size of the area you've been in is like it is, it's all good.
But as I said before, how you feel isn't how everyone feels about the size, and when you drag how people feel about the size of the world into the discussion, then it's still subjective. You can't say that it's wrong for those other people to feel the game world is large, just as it can't be said that it's wrong if you feel that the game world is small. After all, it's all people's personal opinions.
However, the actual physical size of the canvas they've used for the gameworld, that is what can be determined by testing, and that can actually be compared to that of other game worlds. How people actually feel about each game world, that's up to them.
Wow you are stubborn! lol
Even if you know about them, it doesnt change the optical illusion, and I know that you know it. You just do not want to admit it.
Has no one taken any Sightseeing & Scenery video's yet during beta ?
Come on fans I'm sure someone must have Frap'ed something during beta!!
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
Has no one taken any Sightseeing & Scenery video's yet during beta ?
Come on fans I'm sure someone must have Frap'ed something during beta!!
I started to do it but then I noticed that there wasnt much to see.
No majestic flight paths.
No seemingly out of place ruin.
Not many areas to take advantage of the view distance.
Ect.
I guess I could have taken a video of either of the dungeons or the fire squirrel quest ( the only memorable quest ) but that wouldnt have been very satisfying.
I agree with the OP. While the area that does exisist is packed with mobs/quests, there just isn't much to it. Even the capital "cities" are meager and more like a palace than a town. Some may not be bothered by this, but I would much prefer a full world to explore.
Cmmon people. We were shown only 2 areas. And those were brim full of activity.
I think also that they opted for smaller but full VS big but empty
To minimize travelling times - i mean we all love those, dont we
With what is out and whats coming Rift is nothing special. Has the "path" that leads you to every place you need to go. You can stand there and see the mobs you need to get..you could toss a rock and hit them. Sure in the beginning the maps are really small. Most mmo's are. But when you got to 19..maps were? Lol small. Now duh the fans going to love the game no matter what.
This is one of those mmos you HAVE to try before you buy or you will be upset. If they have a open beta try it.
For me the start was a blast but 12-20.. pffft you still feel your doing the same thing. It really goes down hill. Just read the Rift forums. Weed through it and get an idea of the game.
Rifts are fun but lol WARHAMMER anyone. Yep the one that does most the work gets the best loot..so far. It is nice to see the rift open and what comes out sometimes keeps going and killing until you stop it.. that I LOVED! But as of now it really lacks something and this has been said by way to many.
Has no one taken any Sightseeing & Scenery video's yet during beta ?
Come on fans I'm sure someone must have Frap'ed something during beta!!
I started to do it but then I noticed that there wasnt much to see.
No majestic flight paths.
No seemingly out of place ruin.
Not many areas to take advantage of the view distance.
Ect.
I guess I could have taken a video of either of the dungeons or the fire squirrel quest ( the only memorable quest ) but that wouldnt have been very satisfying.
It would be nice if someone could make a compilation video thread, so that people that are not in the beta could get a better understanding of the flow of the game.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
It feels small. Maybe because everything is so linear, running from West to East on Guardian side it felt even smaller. Defiant side felt more spread out.
It needs landmarks, points of interest - things that help to create a living world, like farms, towns, villages, but there just doesn't feel any room for those. Instead it's tiny, tiny quest hubs with generic NPCs giving you your next chore and a narrow land mass crammed with mobs.
The tunnelling just doesn't help either with the feeling of being jammed in. WoW has tunnelling but it offers quests in a wide area and slowly eases you out into the wider world. Rift just throws you onto a train track from left to right.
I think this is going to be a major flaw on release. The run from Freesand to Moonshade (2 extremes) is literally a few minutes.
This is total bs. Those zones weren't even available in the beta and the two zones that were took a few minutes EACH to run through. Which would make like 30 min or more (very roughly) to go across the world.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
I think this is going to be a major flaw on release. The run from Freesand to Moonshade (2 extremes) is literally a few minutes.
This is total bs. Those zones weren't even available in the beta and the two zones that were took a few minutes EACH to run through. Which would make like 30 min or more (very roughly) to go across the world.
Before you make an idiot out of yourself. They were available in alphas.
Originally posted by donkeys I think this is going to be a major flaw on release. The run from Freesand to Moonshade (2 extremes) is literally a few minutes. Although there are plenty of quests and Rifts, the zone world itself is tiny, it's way less than EQ and WoW had on release. The beta was level capped so I couldn't see every dungeon and area, but I was amazed at how little physical content Rift had.
I think it depends a lot more on what they do with the zones than how big the zones are physically. You are on a pretty linear quest track, so once you're done with a zone you're not going back. They are big enough to hold the quests you need to get through the areas and that's enough. Anything more is really just wasted space.
I would much rather they built a decent base for the game and released a game that actually worked, and then went back and added new starter areas, new mid level quest areas, etc.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I think it depends a lot more on what they do with the zones than how big the zones are physically. You are on a pretty linear quest track, so once you're done with a zone you're not going back. They are big enough to hold the quests you need to get through the areas and that's enough. Anything more is really just wasted space.
I would much rather they built a decent base for the game and released a game that actually worked, and then went back and added new starter areas, new mid level quest areas, etc.
"It's a tiny tiny world....".
Well releasing a working game first and add to it later did work OK for LOTRO and the game is larger than LOTRO, AoC and WAR were at launch.
But they better actually add stuff faster than Mythic and Funcom.
I am not impressed with the size of the world but most gameworlds have been pretty small at release for the past few years and I seen a lot worse. As long as they add updates regularly I don't see a problem.
If they however just plan to release a payed expansion every second year and not much more it is bad news. And the zones could have been larger, but since the game is about to release I rather have them fix performance now and worry about increasing the world later.
I think it depends a lot more on what they do with the zones than how big the zones are physically. You are on a pretty linear quest track, so once you're done with a zone you're not going back. They are big enough to hold the quests you need to get through the areas and that's enough. Anything more is really just wasted space.
I would much rather they built a decent base for the game and released a game that actually worked, and then went back and added new starter areas, new mid level quest areas, etc.
Large half empty zones for exploration is not wasted space. But I agree that the important thing is to release a working game right now, more content can be added later but you can't patch in a broken game later, LOTRO had very little content at launch while VG had a lot but were broken.
Even if you know about them, it doesnt change the optical illusion, and I know that you know it. You just do not want to admit it.
Hehe, oh, I did see your point.
You're just saying that you are right in your belief that the world feels small trying to found it with dragging some 'architectural design theory' into the argument, while I am saying that it's all relative and subjective because it happens to be about feelings and impressions, and those are personal and subjective.
As the diversity in comments by posters in several threads prove: basically you're saying that you're right feeling the world is small and others are wrong for feeling the world is large, and to vindicate yourself you wave some vague theory around.
That doesn't make you right at all, yours is just one of many opinions and not the Ultimate Truth, deal with it
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Comments
//////Stamp of Approval\\\\\\
Your post so nailed it. There can always be extra servers if the population is to big for the current area. But if you make it too big, you will have massive wasted space with empty nothingness like Mortal Online had. You could literally run or horseback for long distances in MO and not see a single soul.
Too many of you are thinking too small (pun intended), the tiny world doesnt necessarily have to refer to actual land size in the game...
Rather the feel of a tiny world. Morrowind for example was a game with smaller land mass than its sequel, Oblivion, yet it felt much larger.
It also can include, and does, the design of the world. Buildings are tiny, the faction cities are a couple of buildings. WoW's capital cities make Rift's faction cities look like a one bedroom studio apartment.
Land mass is moot.
Yeah it's pretty small, I agree.
K....... I've played both betas and yeah it's really small and doesn't make you feel like it's big either.
That's actually a very good point. As said, perception can be subjective, but that doesn't mean it can't be specified.
The comparison between Morrowind and Oblivion for example, can you specify what it was exactly that gave Morrowind more the feeling of vastness than Oblivion for you, like specific details and examples?
As for the buildings, I agree, a handful of buildings doesn't make a city. Also, flooding an area with mobs with no or too few quiet spots as counterpoint can make an area feel cramped and claustrophobic.
Keep in mind though, that only a small portion of the entire available locations was accessible, the screenshots of the other areas also show wide open areas. That's why I trust hard figures often more than subjective feelings and perceptions.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Easily. Layout, large buildigs on varying heights. The developers made it so you cant just walk in a straight line from one side to the other. There were cliffs and rocks, there was a lot of variety in land shape while enemies were not clumped in a predictable or illdesigned manner. It was unpredictable. You create the illusion of larger size by breaking up the quick point A to point B flow.
Oblivion was the exact opposite. There was a lack of variety, open landmass, and every few steps was the same stock dungeon. If you were at one dungeon entrance, you could see 3 or 4 more from that spot.
A lot of it really doesnt come down to subjective feelings, since there are known rules and patterns in level design. There exists academic theory and study on the subject. Just as a magic trick wont change how one sees it, it is still just the illusion of magic. Knowing the same means of illusion is important for designers.
It is even more difficult when players are accustomed large scale design properties. Large cities, even if half the background in them is merely a 2D image of buildings, buildings you can enter, moving npcs...ect
Hmmm, while I'm aware that there are rules to and studies about level design or architectural design in general, that doesn't relate 1 on 1 to people's perception or subjective feeling about it.
Take for example Rift's size: when you would do a poll about it or even following the posts, then you'll not see a clearly defined choice where people say 'Rift is small' or 'Rift is large'. While presumably according to theory and implementing design rules, it should be clear which game environment should feel larger to everyone and which smaller compared to other MMORPG's. Polls and posts would prove that it's nothing that clear.
Hence the subjective opinions: that someone feels an environment is small, doesn't mean it is small, and if someone feels an area is small (or large), doesn't mean another person cannot feels that same area to be large (or small).
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Is the above image only made up of boxes without any curved lines?
Which center line is longer?
Which one has the larger dot in the center?
I dont think its subjective to say that you saw, just as everyone else sees, 1) curved lines in the first image even though there are none, 2) the line on the left is longer when in fact they are the same length, and 3) that the dot on the right is smaller even though they are exactly the same in size.
My point is simply this, there are rules to optical illusions and for manipulating perception, they are not as subjective as you think, rather knowing what makes the effect work.... good level designers can do the same thing.
I
optical illusion! To think that its all due to how the brain register information... its fascinating.
MOAR! lol
I've actually seen these pictures and others like it many times, so I look differently at them.
Hey mate, if you want to provide justification why how you feel about the size of the area you've been in is like it is, it's all good.
But as I said before, how you feel isn't how everyone feels about the size, and when you drag how people feel about the size of the world into the discussion, then it's still subjective. You can't say that it's wrong for those other people to feel the game world is large, just as it can't be said that it's wrong if you feel that the game world is small. After all, it's all people's personal opinions.
However, the actual physical size of the canvas they've used for the gameworld, that is what can be determined by testing, and that can actually be compared to that of other game worlds. How people actually feel about each game world, that's up to them.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Wow you are stubborn! lol
Even if you know about them, it doesnt change the optical illusion, and I know that you know it. You just do not want to admit it.
The world isnt small ... dont know what map you have been looking at.
RIFT is in great shape, very few acutal bugs. Cant wait for the game to get released.
Has no one taken any Sightseeing & Scenery video's yet during beta ?
Come on fans I'm sure someone must have Frap'ed something during beta!!
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
I started to do it but then I noticed that there wasnt much to see.
No majestic flight paths.
No seemingly out of place ruin.
Not many areas to take advantage of the view distance.
Ect.
I guess I could have taken a video of either of the dungeons or the fire squirrel quest ( the only memorable quest ) but that wouldnt have been very satisfying.
Cmmon people. We were shown only 2 areas. And those were brim full of activity.
I think also that they opted for smaller but full VS big but empty
To minimize travelling times - i mean we all love those, dont we
This is one of those mmos you HAVE to try before you buy or you will be upset. If they have a open beta try it.
For me the start was a blast but 12-20.. pffft you still feel your doing the same thing. It really goes down hill. Just read the Rift forums. Weed through it and get an idea of the game.
Rifts are fun but lol WARHAMMER anyone. Yep the one that does most the work gets the best loot..so far. It is nice to see the rift open and what comes out sometimes keeps going and killing until you stop it.. that I LOVED! But as of now it really lacks something and this has been said by way to many.
It would be nice if someone could make a compilation video thread, so that people that are not in the beta could get a better understanding of the flow of the game.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
It feels small. Maybe because everything is so linear, running from West to East on Guardian side it felt even smaller. Defiant side felt more spread out.
It needs landmarks, points of interest - things that help to create a living world, like farms, towns, villages, but there just doesn't feel any room for those. Instead it's tiny, tiny quest hubs with generic NPCs giving you your next chore and a narrow land mass crammed with mobs.
The tunnelling just doesn't help either with the feeling of being jammed in. WoW has tunnelling but it offers quests in a wide area and slowly eases you out into the wider world. Rift just throws you onto a train track from left to right.
This is total bs. Those zones weren't even available in the beta and the two zones that were took a few minutes EACH to run through. Which would make like 30 min or more (very roughly) to go across the world.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
Before you make an idiot out of yourself. They were available in alphas.
Collector's editions are scams.
I think it depends a lot more on what they do with the zones than how big the zones are physically. You are on a pretty linear quest track, so once you're done with a zone you're not going back. They are big enough to hold the quests you need to get through the areas and that's enough. Anything more is really just wasted space.
I would much rather they built a decent base for the game and released a game that actually worked, and then went back and added new starter areas, new mid level quest areas, etc.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
"It's a tiny tiny world....".
Well releasing a working game first and add to it later did work OK for LOTRO and the game is larger than LOTRO, AoC and WAR were at launch.
But they better actually add stuff faster than Mythic and Funcom.
I am not impressed with the size of the world but most gameworlds have been pretty small at release for the past few years and I seen a lot worse. As long as they add updates regularly I don't see a problem.
If they however just plan to release a payed expansion every second year and not much more it is bad news. And the zones could have been larger, but since the game is about to release I rather have them fix performance now and worry about increasing the world later.
Large half empty zones for exploration is not wasted space. But I agree that the important thing is to release a working game right now, more content can be added later but you can't patch in a broken game later, LOTRO had very little content at launch while VG had a lot but were broken.
Hehe, oh, I did see your point.
You're just saying that you are right in your belief that the world feels small trying to found it with dragging some 'architectural design theory' into the argument, while I am saying that it's all relative and subjective because it happens to be about feelings and impressions, and those are personal and subjective.
As the diversity in comments by posters in several threads prove: basically you're saying that you're right feeling the world is small and others are wrong for feeling the world is large, and to vindicate yourself you wave some vague theory around.
That doesn't make you right at all, yours is just one of many opinions and not the Ultimate Truth, deal with it
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."