A Big World != Empty

Vhaln · February 2007

I've seen a lot of posts say that Vanguard feels empty because it's so big. Not even sure which one to reply to, so just wanted to start a new topic to argue the point.

Let's say you have a game area with five Points of Interest. It shouldn't matter how much open wilderness is between those five points, each of them can still be interesting. I'd say, even more so, if they're not clumped together like part of an amusement part. It seems to me, it should make the game feel more alive, to have lots of wilderness between handcrafted POIs.

The problem is when you have lots of wilderness, and NO points of interest. Or none that are all that interesting. Now, maybe it's because I'm still a newbie, but that seems to be Vanguard's problem to me. It's not that the world is too big. It's that it doesn't even have the handcrafted little parts that a well-crafted smaller gameworld would have. A well-crafted gameworld of any size would have.

I'll get even more specific. Let's say you have a desert, the best example of boring wilderness. You can either have a huge desert, with a big fancy pharoah's ruins tucked away in the middle, or you can have a pharoah's ruins that is pretty much the whole desert. I'd greatly prefer the first option, but either way can be fun. The second will just be a more shallow feeling sort of fun. I just hate to see a big desert with no fancy epic ruins at all. That's when it'd feel dead boring.

There's no reason big should have to mean empty. Which is how Vanguard feels to me, at least so far.

ABRaquel · February 2007

Many POIs are hidden and don't show up on the map. It was SIGILs plan to "force" some exploration.

I agree with the boring wilderness, SWG had some dynamic with packs, predator vs prey.

Vhaln · February 2007

With so much view distance, how do you hide an "epic" feeling POI? Shouldn't I be able to see it a mile away? I explore a lot, probably a big part of why I level slow, but mostly it just gets me killed.

Markaj · February 2007

I would much rather have a smaller world with a whole lot more fun content than a big world as empty as soap. You are right in your assesment.

Isometrix · February 2007

Bad art direction.. said in many reviews too. The graphics themselves are great, but the environments, the cities, the forests, all so uninspired. When you run around in WoW, as much as I hate the game, you see unique themes. Nobody can deny that Ashenvale Forest looks and feels great. But a forest in Vanguard feels like just another forest.. 500 trees all looking the same, a patch of open ground with the enemies all over it. It just feels like you're walking around in a box that had it's landscape auto-generated, rather than being part of a living world.

Phoenixs · February 2007

Bigger world = more empty space. So I can live with the game world not being as packed as many other game worlds. But there is alot to work on here. Alot of the world design has more of a generated feel to it, than handmade. But overall the world works ok, atleast in the lower lvl areas.

What I have noticed though while looking at some of the blogs from higher lvl players is that many of the areas later on seem very empty. Is it so that the game world isn't done yet?

Most of the blogs I was going to post images from are now turned private, but here are some:

Many of these shots aren't taken on the highest settings, true, but that doesn't do anything about the world looking kinda empty in many of those shots.

bmjames80 · February 2007

Whoever's screenshots you are using has the settings way down.... i dont believe thats even balanced quality in the game.

Kremlik · February 2007

Heres my 2 copper:

Empty space = room to add content easy IMO.. It beats making a chuck of a world that takes over 2 years to make thats really tiny

While I do agree that SOME areas are lacking, however it's better then tripping over 10 mobs every footstep.. Plus very few players within VG have realise not all content is ground level, we've still got the sky and sea to explore .. POIs are there but it takes ages to find them =/

swede2 · February 2007

Originally posted by Vhaln

I've seen a lot of posts say that Vanguard feels empty because it's so big. Not even sure which one to reply to, so just wanted to start a new topic to argue the point.
Let's say you have a game area with five Points of Interest. It shouldn't matter how much open wilderness is between those five points, each of them can still be interesting. I'd say, even more so, if they're not clumped together like part of an amusement part. It seems to me, it should make the game feel more alive, to have lots of wilderness between handcrafted POIs.
The problem is when you have lots of wilderness, and NO points of interest. Or none that are all that interesting. Now, maybe it's because I'm still a newbie, but that seems to be Vanguard's problem to me. It's not that the world is too big. It's that it doesn't even have the handcrafted little parts that a well-crafted smaller gameworld would have. A well-crafted gameworld of any size would have.
I'll get even more specific. Let's say you have a desert, the best example of boring wilderness. You can either have a huge desert, with a big fancy pharoah's ruins tucked away in the middle, or you can have a pharoah's ruins that is pretty much the whole desert. I'd greatly prefer the first option, but either way can be fun. The second will just be a more shallow feeling sort of fun. I just hate to see a big desert with no fancy epic ruins at all. That's when it'd feel dead boring.
There's no reason big should have to mean empty. Which is how Vanguard feels to me, at least so far.

Yes there is a reason in a game with a death penalty you cant just fill in every space with mobs you would never be able to go anywhere. All's you would be doing is corpse run after corpse run and you would be stuck in the small little area of mobs that are around your level that would suck big time

Am a level 14 ranger who is level 30 weapon smith and i harvest in area's that hold level 20-25 mobs , try it you might not think tthe game feels empty for long and the game has so many points of interest that no matter where i go or what i do it always takes me about 1 hour longer than it should because i dont neeed some fancy pharoah's ruin alls i have to do is look around and go wow this game is totally awesome , or walk up to the side of a cliff and look over . slow down and smell the roses Vhaln theres one thing no game maker can add to a game and thats the ability to use your own imagination a little bit ,try it really make's any game alot better

Suitepee · February 2007

I'm still getting this 'empty' feeling. I barely see anyone in Veenax Garrison or the Village after it still,although at night there's at least some people about. (but not many!)

I'm starting to think it's the FFA PvP server,instead of the game world. I barely see anyone around even at night-time for me.

Maybe someone could perhaps suggest a populated server/race?

Blurr · February 2007

Anyone can run around and look for places where there aren't any people so you can take a screenshot of them.

Like every other game, there are some places where there's lots of people, and there are some places where there's very few people. Vanguard having a huge game-world just means that there are more of both places.

fgauer · February 2007

Originally posted by Kremlik

Heres my 2 copper:
Empty space = room to add content easy IMO.. It beats making a chuck of a world that takes over 2 years to make thats really tiny
While I do agree that SOME areas are lacking, however it's better then tripping over 10 mobs every footstep.. Plus very few players within VG have realise not all content is ground level, we've still got the sky and sea to explore .. POIs are there but it takes ages to find them =/

/agreed - I believe they have layed the groundwork for a whole lot of future content. I also don't consider the world empty at all - just big - and it fits within the context of what they have created. They didn't create this environment to be 'similar' to other games out there - it is what it is - and it works (at least for me) as it is.

So you travel a bunch - it's neither here nor there for me - but when you do get to camps, caves, etc. There is plenty of content and action there to be engaging (again - my opinion)...

random11 · February 2007

Obviously there is a place for future work to be added. But are we in that future? No. Are we close to it? No. Stop thinking about the future, you pay 15$ a month now, meaning the world should be dense enough now. Space is only good as long as it has it's uses, if space is there only to make your travel time longer, then it's only a miserable attempt to make the game feel epic and hard, but it's not real.

Imho any space that exists should be filled with content. When adding new content add new places, so the overall density of the world is the same. When I experienced it the world wasn't dense enough.

The days of UO and EQ are gone folks, the industry needs to redefine hard. Hard content doesn't mean a lot of time spent, obviously Sigil doesn't know that though.

parmenion · February 2007

You simply aren't finding them then, was treking across a desert exploring with our group and noticed a little dip in the ground, moved up on it and there appeared to be two mobs guarding an entrance that was quite well hidden so we fought in and found a massive cave system down there with quest givers and all sorts. Similar story exploring a beached shipwreck and there's this little passage you can drop down and find a big semi-underwater cave system, or another with a hugely ornate underground temple etc.

It's a different feeling from some other games, Sigil don't put a big neon sign up saying "look look we built an actual dungeon aren't we clever, btw you are supposed to live here from level X to Y then you'll be moved to the next levelling room" some people like that, some people call having to look for stuff empty. Different tastes I guess.

The world is packed with content, absolutely rammed with it, if you haven't seen it, it's because you haven't gone looking, simple as that. by level 30 - I'm guessing about probably a quarter of the way to hitting endgame in time terms, we've been to 40+ major dungeons and a ton of areas - that's already significantly more than the entire levelling to cap process of some other games.

Tnice · February 2007

I think the discrepancy with people's impressions of Vanguard is due to two different types of Players. Some players like being virtual tourists. They like being able to explore a big world and may like the empty feeling that is currently in Vanguard. These Players may also like virtual worlds such as SecondLife as well. Regardless, they like the openest of Vanguard and are patient enough to wait for the adventure.

On the other hand you have Players that are more pure Gamers. These people like games such as Quake, Battlefield, etc. These players do not like being virtual tourists. They like action. Typically, they do not craft or do the Vanguard card game either. These people may not like Vanguard in its current state because it takes so many timesinks to get to the real action. Before you can get to the action in Vanguard you need to travel a long distance, do a lot yelling "Looking for Group!", retrieve your corpse, etc.

The size of a game's virtual world is analyzed by an ex-EQ2 Designer on his blog here --> www.nerfbat.com/

I am not sure if the Devs meant for Vanguard to be a big open, empty world or not. It may just be because they still have a lot of development to do or maybe it is by design. In my personal opinion it is a problem. I am not saying that MOBs should be in every inch of the virtual world but in it's current form Vanguard seems barren and empty and simply not fun.

Roin · February 2007

Originally posted by random11

Obviously there is a place for future work to be added. But are we in that future? No. Are we close to it? No. Stop thinking about the future, you pay 15$ a month now, meaning the world should be dense enough now. Space is only good as long as it has it's uses, if space is there only to make your travel time longer, then it's only a miserable attempt to make the game feel epic and hard, but it's not real.

Imho any space that exists should be filled with content. When adding new content add new places, so the overall density of the world is the same. When I experienced it the world wasn't dense enough.

The days of UO and EQ are gone folks, the industry needs to redefine hard. Hard content doesn't mean a lot of time spent, obviously Sigil doesn't know that though.

Agree 100%. Very informed opinion.

Mrbloodworth · February 2007

I have seen many areas that have buildings ETC.. and even full dungeons that simply do not have there content in yet (IE: Mobs, quest objectives ETC..). They are sitting there, waiting to be populated.

Cymdai · February 2007

Originally posted by random11

Obviously there is a place for future work to be added. But are we in that future? No. Are we close to it? No. Stop thinking about the future, you pay 15$ a month now, meaning the world should be dense enough now. Space is only good as long as it has it's uses, if space is there only to make your travel time longer, then it's only a miserable attempt to make the game feel epic and hard, but it's not real.

Imho any space that exists should be filled with content. When adding new content add new places, so the overall density of the world is the same. When I experienced it the world wasn't dense enough.

The days of UO and EQ are gone folks, the industry needs to redefine hard. Hard content doesn't mean a lot of time spent, obviously Sigil doesn't know that though.

QFT

I've said it a million times. When I pay and play a game, I'm doing so for what it IS, not what it WILL BECOME over time.

This was also a problem numerous folks had in beta. The long, empty, agonizing travel with little-to-no immersion factor. It's one of the fanboi's favorite arguements: "The world is empty because it's so much bigger in scope than anything else out there". That's all well and good, but all it says to me is that every other game out there had a firmer grasp on their limitations, whereas Sigil apparently does not.

Am I the only one who frequently users "Autorun" in most MMO's? I'm not looking to spend an hour going from point A to point B, especially when there's nothing worth looking at the majority of the time.

Also, those screenshots from earlier are a bit biased. I realize Telon is a desolate place, but there's not even any bushes or grass drawn in. It looks like they're on the lowest settings possible.

adliPremo · February 2007

I guess I'm the opposite of most posters. I prefer a massive landscape to give the game an epic feeling, even if it's not fully populated. There is plenty of content for a casual gamer like myself, and I'm looking forward to all the additions to come.

The devs are working fervently on getting this thing up to speed, and I'm optimistic about the future of Vanguard.

RemyVorender · February 2007

Originally posted by Blurr

Anyone can run around and look for places where there aren't any people so you can take a screenshot of them.
Like every other game, there are some places where there's lots of people, and there are some places where there's very few people. Vanguard having a huge game-world just means that there are more of both places.

someone please post some good looking screens of a busy town please.

Phoenixs · February 2007

Originally posted by Cymdai

Also, those screenshots from earlier are a bit biased. I realize Telon is a desolate place, but there's not even any bushes or grass drawn in. It looks like they're on the lowest settings possible.

I did say that some of them where taken on low settings. But the only thing the world looses on low settings is the obvious like texture resolution, poly count and effects. But the objects stay the same. So when there are no rocks/bushes on those low quality shots, there won't be any on a higher quality either. The only thing that would appear on higher quality would be the grass, which is only a render effect.

binman624 · February 2007

Try taking the road directly south out of Veksals Exchange. At the chunk line the road starts to end and your running across open territory. There are SO many mobs in that area that it is almost impossible to travel more than 100 FT wihtout something chasing you.

grinreaper · February 2007

Originally posted by remyburke

Originally posted by Blurr

Anyone can run around and look for places where there aren't any people so you can take a screenshot of them.
Like every other game, there are some places where there's lots of people, and there are some places where there's very few people. Vanguard having a huge game-world just means that there are more of both places.

someone please post some good looking screens of a busy town please.

you want population? go east from Hathor zi

Me? I will take nice a spread out place over packed in like sardines anyday...you sure cant complain about 'shoebox' game play

Oh , and WoW has style alright...like disneyland style...look, its Orcland, packed next toTrollland, which is next to Undeadland, which has the ride that you can even stand in line for, ect, ect...bah!

Vhaln · February 2007

How many of you actually read and understand my original post? Or even recognize the "not equal" sign in the subject? Not many, judging by the replies...

I was trying to address the common view that it's empty, and was disagreeing with the conclusion that it feels empty because it's too big.

Big is good, IMO. Vanguard could even be bigger. I think "wasted space" makes a gameworld deeper and more immersive.

I think the real problem is with the parts that are NOT "wasted space." The content which I finally get to, only to feel totally underwhelmed. Just trying to say that I think that's the real problem. Not that games should be more compact, and jammed full of content.

Tnice · February 2007

Originally posted by Vhaln

How many of you actually read and understand my original post? Or even recognize the "not equal" sign in the subject? Not many, judging by the replies...
I was trying to address the common view that it's empty, and was disagreeing with the conclusion that it feels empty because it's too big.
Big is good, IMO. Vanguard could even be bigger. I think "wasted space" makes a gameworld deeper and more immersive.
I just think the real problem is with the parts that are not "wasted space." The content which I finally get to, only to feel totally underwhelmed. Just trying to say that I think that's the real problem. Not that games should be more compact, and jammed full of content.

I think it is just because the world is not fnished yet. I base this on the fact that the oceans are completely empty. There is nothing in them. I think the land content is the same.

dodsfall · February 2007

Personally I feel the game world in Vanguard feels a bit too empty.

While I do agree that jamming mobs into every conceivable area would be bad, I am hoping future content will fill these areas in just a bit.

I enjoy Vanguard's bigger world more than the somewhat claustrophobic one of DDO, but that's a personal preference.

Howdy, Stranger!

A Big World != Empty

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

A Big World != Empty

Comments