31 replies to this topic

[RIFT]

Personally I feel that games always launch with too few maps, and in some cases I stop playing the game because of this. BF3 is a great example of a good game with too few maps, and they waited too long too add more. IMO you cant launch with too many (good) maps.

Or at least follow up with a map a month launch after release

[Steamroller Stig]

Personally I think BF3 is the worst of the series. even worse the BF:heros and BF:p4f. battlefield 3 had plenty maps at launch they were all just terrible.

and you are right you cant ever launch with too many maps. but I would rather have quality over quantity.

[McScwizzy]

I chose 3-6, but at this point I do not care. JUST GIVE ME THE GAME!!!

[CrunchTheRobot]

I'd go with the 3-6 maps option, simply because I think it's a good amount to start the game with. It gives people time to become familiar with the maps while new maps are being created. It also seems like the amount of maps I'd want to have so that I don't become bored too quickly.

[FLAKPANZER]

I would love to see 6 - 10, with more to follow shortly after release.

I don't think you can have too many. What usually tends to happen, though, is that people zone in on two or three maps, and then its hard to find servers running any of the other ones.

[Howling Mad Murdock]

To keep people interested the more maps with varied settings/environments the more likely you are to keep players coming back for more. I think 6 maps would be a good starting place but like many people have already said..... just playing it on one map will be fantastic so let us at it!!

[Angelicon]

FLAKPANZER, on 16 May 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

I would love to see 6 - 10, with more to follow shortly after release.

I don't think you can have too many. What usually tends to happen, though, is that people zone in on two or three maps, and then its hard to find servers running any of the other ones.

I'm pretty sure we won't have direct control of which map we'll be on in any given match.

/edit for OT -- 6-10 seems like enough for starters.

What I hope they do is make 6-10 solid, very different maps, then just alter about 10-20% of those maps in different ways to add variety but not require so much added work.

Example -- say they have a map named Deep Forest that has a river down the middle and a big rise on one side. They could make a couple additional Deep Forest maps by just thinning the trees on the hill, drying up the river, flooding the river, adding some open areas.

This way when you see "Deep Forest" show up as your map for that match, but you don't know -exactly- what it is going to look like. This provides good variety and some Fog of War at a lowered amount of effort for the devs.

Edited by Angelicon, 16 May 2012 - 06:18 AM.

[RIFT]

FLAKPANZER, on 16 May 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

I would love to see 6 - 10, with more to follow shortly after release.

I don't think you can have too many. What usually tends to happen, though, is that people zone in on two or three maps, and then its hard to find servers running any of the other ones.

I will assume that they will run the game much like World of Tanks...where a map is chosen randomly.

[Felix Dracc]

I'd like at least 6 on launch even if there not all good some variety is nice.

[CoffiNail]

I voted 6-10, with 1 or 2 coming out a month.

[Wraith01]

3-6 would do me just fine to be starting with. I'm a bit of a James May when it comes to learing maps.

[El Loco]

I feel compelled to remind everyone that balancing maps is a lot harder than balancing the 'Mechs and weapons. Although I wholheartedly agree with you on the fact that you can never have too many maps in a game, creating and testing maps takes a lot of time and ressources. Therefore, I think we'll start with 3 or 4 maps and can feel lucky if we see maps added in 3 month intervals.

[Morashtak]

And we have new concept art of the Desert Map now to talk about.

Laser Boats beware!

[Monky]

I would like to see 6 or so on launch, enough for a wide variety of terrain styles. However, form comes after function - 'better maps' is more important than 'more maps'.

[Zakatak]

For the MWO beta? 4 maps is fine. For the full release however? There are over 2000 planets in the Inner Sphere and alot of them are significant to the story. I would like at least 12 maps on release day. Outreach, Hesperus II, Styk, New Avalon, and The Rock preferably being part of that list.

Edited by Zakatak, 16 May 2012 - 01:43 PM.

[Heron]

6 maps would be fine for launch

The players will be fighting on many planets throughout the Inner Sphere. A player's immersion in the game will take a big hit when after fighting on one world over a lake they land on a different planet and fight over the same lake. It would be ideal if over the course of the game's life each planet would get at least one unique map.

[Applejack]

They could have 1 good map for all I care. Keep in mind, GOOD MAP. I find games with too many maps will often have a horrid one in the mix, and with company-controlled map rotations, you can't kick it out.

One good map is all we need. Seriously!

[Solis Obscuri]

Morashtak, on 16 May 2012 - 01:19 PM, said:

And we have new concept art of the Desert Map now to talk about.

Laser Boats beware!

Whoa. While the main map they've been showing us smacks of the PNW, that looks just amazingly alien - it's like Arrakis reimagined as a lava field or something!

[Chunkymonkey]

Maybe different planets, say 3-5 at the beginning and partially randomized maps, say on a urban map, they could just move the buildings around. Of course they could have a few hardlined maps too like New Avalon or such. I would always look foward to new content though.

[That Guy]

the poll question is a bit unfair. obviously we would all like there to be as many maps as possible. but i think the question you are really looking for is how many is realistic to expect