Support NeoGAF

[Gaiff]

Mainly in open-world games. I think maps are in no small part responsible for ruining the thrill of exploration in games.

The problem isn't the map in and of itself, but the utterly lazy design philosophy that compels the developers to craft bland and uninteresting worlds because they have a map to guide the player. A huge problem is that maps now discourage exploration. When you know where everything is, why would you bother visiting those ruins or that fort? It's widely known that gamers don't do most of the side content, so they just go straight for the objective indicated on the map, which in turns doesn't incentivize them to look around for what they want and this has of course the effect of them not discovering things on their own. It creates this sort of feedback loop where drab worlds need a map and maps lead to the creation of more drab worlds.

The most fun part of an open world is supposed to be, you know, the world, but this is almost never the case. I just tried the Visions of Mana demo and actually got angry when I could press a button and get a nice waypoint telling me where to go next. No, fuck off. Let me discover. Put landmarks, lead the player off the beaten paths, place points of interests that catch the eye and compel them to go look for what's out there.

I'd rather have a world so well crafted that the player can find their way not with a map but with landmarks and the environment (like we do in real life when we're familiar with an area). Instead, all we got are shitty bland worlds paired with maps full of icons. Hell, I'd love to see an open world game without a map to see how the dev tackles the challenge of guiding the player with just their eyes and ears.

It's not the first time nor the last that we're discussing the topic, but Visions of Mana angered me so I felt like complaining to GAF.

 

[Leviathicus]

I don't hate them but is nice when games have a mode to play without them. I think Days Gone did something like that if I remember right.

 

[Nonehxc]

Mainly in open-world games. I think maps are in no small part responsible for ruining the thrill of exploration in games.

The problem isn't the map in and of itself, but the utterly lazy design philosophy that compels the developers to craft bland and uninteresting worlds because they have a map to guide the player. A huge problem is that maps now discourage exploration. When you know where everything is, why would you bother visiting those ruins or that fort? It's widely known that gamers don't do most of the side content, so they just go straight for the objective indicated on the map, which in turns doesn't incentivize them to look around for what they want and this has of course the effect of them not discovering things on their own. It creates this sort of feedback loop where drab worlds need a map and maps lead to the creation of more drab worlds.

The most fun part of an open world is supposed to be, you know, the world, but this is almost never the case. I just tried the Visions of Mana demo and actually got angry when I could press a button and get a nice waypoint telling me where to go next. No, fuck off. Let me discover. Put landmarks, lead the player off the beaten paths, place points of interests that catch the eye and compel them to go look for what's out there.

I'd rather have a world so well crafted that the player can find their way not with a map but with landmarks and the environment (like we do in real life when we're familiar with an area). Instead, all we got are shitty bland worlds paired with maps full of icons. Hell, I'd love to see an open world game without a map to see how the dev tackles the challenge of guiding the player with just their eyes and ears.

It's not the first time nor the last that we're discussing the topic, but Visions of Mana angered me so I felt like complaining to GAF.

Screw u, u damn Cartophobe.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Mappers Unite! Don't worry about the meetup. I know none of us can find the place.

 

[ProtoByte]

like we do in real life when we're familiar with an area

Well that's the key isn't it? When we're familiar with an area.

Most people do defer to maps when they go somewhere new irl.

Most people are not looking for navigation simulation in most of these games.

 

[cireza]

Huge worlds are not put in these games because the games need a huge world, they are put in there because it is one of the stupid/pointless checkboxes that need to be checked in modern days, with the addition of skill tree/crafting and all this useless shit.

These games never needed a huge world, they are filled with bloat, exploring and finding things is not even part of the core experience. More people making games but having no vision (pun intended) at all at what they are doing, and why.

Haven't played Vision of Mana demo yet.

 

[Big Baller]

Dont use maps or waypoints

 

[6502]

I could spend days crossing boring empty planes instead of 15mins or not identifying a warp point with only 5 mins walking across generic fields, mountains, sparse settlements.

Budgets are spiralling, games cost too much and we don't have time to invest in the same number of titles we did years ago.

When faced with such problems clearly the answer is a map, icons and waypoint markers!

 

[Gaiff]

Dont use maps or waypoints

Not really a solution. The game is often designed around them so not using them typically makes things worse.

 

[intbal]

I'm a big fan.

 

[Gaiff]

I'm a big fan.

You know, I loved physical maps when they came with the game. I still have a few left.

 

[Griffon]

I'm absolutely with you OP.
I hate games with mini-maps, you end up looking at that tiny part of the screen and not paying attention to the actual environment you're in.

Its absence is one of the many reasons why Dark Souls is so fucking good.

 

[StueyDuck]

lookee 'ere skeeter, we got one of them mapcists...

 

[NuclearDiarrhea]

Well tough fucking shit OP. We gotta think of the low attention span plebs who want to rush through an 80+ hour open world RPG in 6 hours.

 

[Gaiff]

lookee 'ere skeeter, we got of them mapcists...

Fuck maps.

 

[Hrk69]

We hate maps now GAF

What a time to be alive

 

[ReBurn]

I agree The best part of a video game is being dropped into a place without knowing where you are and with no way to know how to get to where you need to go. Real life doesn't have any maps with icons so why should video games?

 

[Zannegan]

We hate maps now GAF

What a time to be alive

Not maps, per se, but the lazy, samey, environment and quest design that come from having a minimaps and waypoints accessible at all times. I don't 100% agree with his point, but I can see what he means.

 

[Outlier]

Thing exists: "________________"
Someone: "I hate thing! "

Thing does not exist: "..."
Someone: "I wish thing existed! "

Love or hate them, they are usually a net positive.

 

[Edellus]

I'd rather have a world so well crafted that the player can find their way not with a map but with landmarks and the environment (like we do in real life when we're familiar with an area). Instead, all we got are shitty bland worlds paired with maps full of icons. Hell, I'd love to see an open world game without a map to see how the dev tackles the challenge of guiding the player with just their eyes and ears.

If you haven't played it yet, I suggest you play Outward. It's got a map, but it's only a landsmark map. It doesn't tell you where you or the objectives are. You have to find it all via these landmarks and descriptions through the game world. It's very immersive and with lots to explore and discover. A warning though, it's a survival RPG game. It Is prone to be challenging.

I don't "hate" maps, but I agree with the main point. In most games nowadays we explore the map way more than we explore the world, and exploring maps is not particularly engaging.

If games have to have a GPS maps for players who don't want to bother, then fine. But please make them an after thought and don't design the entire game around it.

 

[Gaiff]

If you haven't played it yet, I suggest you play Outward. It's got a map, but it's only a landsmark map. It doesn't tell you where you or the objectives are. You have to find it all via these landmarks and descriptions through the game world. It's very immersive and with lots to explore and discover. A warning though, it's a survival RPG game. It Is prone to be challenging.

I don't "hate" maps, but I agree with the main point. In most games nowadays we explore the map way more than we explore the world, and exploring maps is not particularly engaging.

If games have to have a GPS maps for players who don't want to bother, then fine. But please make them an after thought and don't design the entire game around it.

Happens to be on sale for $4.80. Bought it and will give it a try.

 

[TintoConCasera]

Loved playing Kingdom Come in extreme mode. You can open the map but it doesn't tell you were you are but, thing is, the map was so well drawn and detailed that you could figure out your position on the map just by looking at it's surroundings. One of my favorite maps in videogames for sure, plua the art is amazing.

 

[Quantum253]

So it's not really the map, but showing you where everything is located by icons? I can agree with that. There are times where I want to know where things are and others I want to explore. I think most games will let you turn all the icons off, so you're free to wonder and explore without knowing where anything is located.

 

[nikos]

I know what you mean. Sometimes I catch myself navigating an area through a mini map and it sort of ruins the experience.

 

[Paltheos]

I'm suddenly reminded of the final dungeon of Xanadu Next. It's an absolutely enormous castle and, unlike every other dungeon, the game actually gives you a map. Wow!

And then you play the dungeon for a while and slowly come to realize that the map the game has given you - a simple 2D print - is nigh useless beyond serving as a loose reference point because of how intertwining and layered the castle's myriad corridors and stairwells are.

I was so happy (mad). That dungeon was great. Eat it, Dark Souls. Xanadu Next is a better game~

 

[Metnut]

I liked the way Elden Ring handled it. No mini-map. An optional map that helped give a general sense of where you were without being like an Ubi map with 10000 points of interest.

 

[Gaiff]

I'm suddenly reminded of the final dungeon of Xanadu Next. It's an absolutely enormous castle and, unlike every other dungeon, the game actually gives you a map. Wow!

And then you play the dungeon for a while and slowly come to realize that the map the game has given you - a simple 2D print - is nigh useless beyond serving as a loose reference point because of how intertwining and layered the castle's myriad corridors and stairwells are.

I was so happy (mad). That dungeon was great. Eat it, Dark Souls. Xanadu Next is a better game~

I was just thinking about how hilarious it'd be for a game to give a map to the player that's completely useless. I'm talking a map that's deliberately completely inaccurate and has nothing to do with the world.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Maps in games are fascinating I’ve seen plenty of monster maps for me they’re extremely useful especially the stuff you go through.

 

[nkarafo]

I only like the maps that you slowly uncover yourself like a fog of war as you explore.

 

[JCK75]

Open World games have just gotten so big that maps+fast travel are a must..
having to walk across an open field for miles multiple times would just become some grating.

 

[Hohenheim]

These maps can often be turned off though.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Don’t look?

But I love maps in Bethesda RPGs pre-Starfield (I enjoy the game but god what a bad decision.)

You can do tons of exploring on your own to find stuff that’s mixed in with the stuff where the location is given away. Especially if you don’t rely too much on fast travel there’s still plenty to explore between the waypoint and where you come from. When I see an unexplored gap between where I am and a location I’ll skip fast traveling closer so I can explore the gap.

 

[Denton]

Yeah Kingdom Come in hardcore mode is my favourite map implementation ever.
You have absolutely gorgeously drawn map that is obscured and only shows where you have been, and it does not show you where you are, so you have to navigate by the environments and sky (sun and stars). Brilliantly immersive.
Can't wait to see maps in KCD2.

 

[Deanington]

I'm a big fan.

This game was not perfect with directions all the time, but god damn this was how exploration should be. Plus, I miss needing a guide. This fucking game needed it and I loved it.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I am right there with you.... especially detailed maps. I would even add quest distance markers/counters.

Combining those two things is the difference between exploring and doing a chore. Just give a map that is a very broad abstract generalization of the "known" world, along with a few artistic landmarks here and there. Such that you can make connections to the in-game world from the realization that what you are seeing looks familiar to what was on the map, or to have a "of so this is what the person that drew the map meant" moment.... and I believe a lot of open world games would be a thousand times better for it.

 

[intbal]

This game was not perfect with directions all the time, but god damn this was how exploration should be. Plus, I miss needing a guide. This fucking game needed it and I loved it.

The superlative thing about Morrowind's map implementation was that the paper map was not precisely identical to the in-game map. It was as if it was drawn by an actual land-bound cartographer, capable of making mistakes in measurements. Also, the paper map has a variety of little markings on it that are unexplained and have no in-game analog. What is that little X maked on the map? Why is it there? The game doesn't mention it. Only way to find out is to travel there and take a look. Genius.

 

[Shake Your Rump]

just tried the Visions of Mana demo and actually got angry when I could press a button and get a nice waypoint telling me where to go next. No, fuck off. Let me discover.

I agree with your overall sentiment, but I found this part funny. You got angry because you pushed the button to show you the waypoint. Just don't push the button? The game is literally "letting you discover" by making it optional. What more do you want?

 

[Dacvak]

I feel like we got really spoiled with BotW. That’s probably the only open world game that I can easily play without a map, since the landmarks are generally memorable and clear, and exploration inevitably leads to progression.

I’d say the only other game that comes close in terms of open world map design is Elden Ring, which is also great.

 

[Games of Today]

Mainly in open-world games. I think maps are in no small part responsible for ruining the thrill of exploration in games.

The problem isn't the map in and of itself, but the utterly lazy design philosophy that compels the developers to craft bland and uninteresting worlds because they have a map to guide the player. A huge problem is that maps now discourage exploration. When you know where everything is, why would you bother visiting those ruins or that fort? It's widely known that gamers don't do most of the side content, so they just go straight for the objective indicated on the map, which in turns doesn't incentivize them to look around for what they want and this has of course the effect of them not discovering things on their own. It creates this sort of feedback loop where drab worlds need a map and maps lead to the creation of more drab worlds.

The most fun part of an open world is supposed to be, you know, the world, but this is almost never the case. I just tried the Visions of Mana demo and actually got angry when I could press a button and get a nice waypoint telling me where to go next. No, fuck off. Let me discover. Put landmarks, lead the player off the beaten paths, place points of interests that catch the eye and compel them to go look for what's out there.

I'd rather have a world so well crafted that the player can find their way not with a map but with landmarks and the environment (like we do in real life when we're familiar with an area). Instead, all we got are shitty bland worlds paired with maps full of icons. Hell, I'd love to see an open world game without a map to see how the dev tackles the challenge of guiding the player with just their eyes and ears.

It's not the first time nor the last that we're discussing the topic, but Visions of Mana angered me so I felt like complaining to GAF.

Play Tchia, you actually have to be able to read a map properly in that game. It's a really fun game mechanic.

Also Far Cry 2 on PC with the New Dunia mod.

 

[Games of Today]

I'm a big fan.

I do the same thing with Red Dead 2.

For some god forsaken reason Rockstar doesn't tell the player where they can and cannot set up a campfire even though there are pre-determined points where you can and cannot camp at.

SO I took it upon myself to mark them all with a blue sharpie for single player and red for places I camped in online even though the locations are interchangeable between the two modes.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I agree with your overall sentiment, but I found this part funny. You got angry because you pushed the button to show you the waypoint. Just don't push the button? The game is literally "letting you discover" by making it optional. What more do you want?

That's not how discovery/curiosity works. If the option is there, you would have to be stupid or deranged to intentionally get lost/be lost when getting directions is just a button press away. The problem is giving you the option, once they do that, they have inadvertently sucked out any sense of adventure or exploration from the game.

Its why the games that are praised the most for being great open-world games, are the ones that have very little in the way of hand-holding with regards to exploration. Even though if you actually look at the content, you will find that they even tend to have less to see or do than a lot of the other open-world games out there.

Trust me, the feeling of going in the general direction of southeast, and stumbling across some kinda ruin, even if all that is in that ruin is a measly treasure chest... is a thousand times better than tapping a button to open a map, on which all the ruins are neatly marked out, highlighting one, selecting it, and then not just getting a waypoint to it, but even a distance counter.

This is just basic game design.

 

[Shake Your Rump]

That's not how discovery/curiosity works. If the option is there, you would have to be stupid or deranged to intentionally get lost/be lost when getting directions is just a button press away. The problem is giving you the option, once they do that, they have inadvertently sucked out any sense of adventure or exploration from the game.

Visions of Mana is a JRPG, not open world exploration. JRPG are linear, story-driven games with combat systems. No one should be surprised that this game has a marker to show the way. One of the chief complaints of older JRPGs is the lack of direction. Older JRPGs were the same design (lacking true exploration), just without waypoint markers. I say this as someone who adores JRPG and has been playing them since 1988.

 

[Cornbread78]

Get your Souls shit outta here ya hardo. Maps all day every day

 

[MujkicHaris]

I love how in Gothic I and II you have to find a specific NPC and buy the map. And it's not even the whole piece, just for the area you are currently in.

 

[TintoConCasera]

I know what you mean. Sometimes I catch myself navigating an area through a mini map and it sort of ruins the experience.

For me the worst offender was Skyrim's compass showing you were all the stuff is before even finding it.

Managed to remove those icons with a mod and man, sudeenly the game became 100% more immersive and fun to explore.

 

[Lambogenie]

Well tough fucking shit OP. We gotta think of the low attention span plebs who want to rush through an 80+ hour open world RPG in 6 hours.

That open world rpg didn't even need to be 80 hours. Usually.

I always use MGS1-3 as definition of extremely tight package. No zone feels too big, there's fun to have in, whether you perv on some posters or shoot windows, the gameplay itself was always excellent.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Visions of Mana is a JRPG, not open world exploration. JRPG are linear, story-driven games with combat systems. No one should be surprised that this game has a marker to show the way.

I don't know where you are getting this from. JRPG simply means Japanese role-playing game. It's not a designation for some weird genre of RPGs that are allowed to have tons of hand-holding or must be linear. And it doesn't matter what kinda game a game is, if it requires you traveling from point to point, if there is any kinda exploration or discovery in the game at all, it would be better off if they put a little more thought into just how much hand-holding or options they give you.

These options are the difference between you actually playing and discovering things and you playing a push-up on the analog stick and keep the marker in center of screen sim.

One of the chief complaints of older JRPGs is the lack of direction. Older JRPGs were the same design (lacking true exploration), just without waypoint markers. I say this as someone who adores JRPG and has been playing them since 1988.

The first JRPG I played was back in 90-something, FF3 I believe... cant remember which one, the one with the three Magitech armour things walking in the snow thingy during the opening credits and cool music. And I can say this much, my love for RPGs in general has weaned more and more as the amount of hand-holding they do has gotten worse. You can have a very strong narrative driven game without all that hand-holding.

 

[Loomy]

There's nothing wrong with maps. You just played a bad demo.

Maps and other wayfinding methods in games are there to help people find things. If every interesting thing in the world was only found next to a distinct landmark that would lead to a very predictable experience. The kind we have today.

If you don't like maps, by all means - do not use it. But it's very helpful for a lot of people to orient themselves and find their way around.

The problem you're describing is poor world design. Removing maps won't force a fix for that.

 

[Loomy]

The first JRPG I played was back in 90-something, FF3 I believe... cant remember which one, the one with the three Magitech armour things walking in the snow thingy during the opening credits and cool music. And I can say this much, my love for RPGs in general has weaned more and more as the amount of hand-holding they do has gotten worse. You can have a very strong narrative driven game without all that hand-holding.

That was FF6, sold as FF3 in North America. Great intro to JRPGs.

 

[Durin]

Too many open-world games take the Ubisoft approach of map marker vomit, so the game will pre-discover quite a few things for you before you even enter an area for yourself, and also tease what mission type you'll do there (usually samey mission types as well).

The last few Zelda games did a better job letting you find locations on your own before you get anything marked on the map, and only some quests would hint at locations on your map with large highlighted areas so you still had to wander a decent sized area to find the thing you're looking for. Combine that with more systemic design that creates more emergent moments, and allow the player to drop quests easily to go do something else, then you can get the actual wanderlust going.