Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

User avatar
PBandJ
Posts: 1296
Joined: 16 Jul 2019 22:54
Location: My computer chair...:)

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#581 Post by PBandJ » 16 May 2021 04:29

You may be right, but I don't think doing a large rebuild would bring in as many as more states, trucks and other type dlc's would if they used those man hours towards those things. Some improvement should be done, but I would be very surprised if it was more than scenery and road updates myself.
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3298
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#582 Post by angrybirdseller » 16 May 2021 07:22

The map will always get incremental improvements just look at the fast food restaurants they added to Utah, Idaho, Washington that will likely make it way to the rest of the map. I think California will get the most of the work the next couple of years. They will improve the map for future buyers as well as current owners put game away come back to play go wow the map look cool now all impulse buy couple map DLC.
User avatar
Sora
Posts: 2183
Joined: 22 Feb 2017 18:47

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#583 Post by Sora » 16 May 2021 09:12

Personally, I strongly value consistency. If an area of the game feels noticeably better or worse, I'm going to avoid one or the other. This results in the map taking on a very unsatisfying shape, though, which in turn results in me getting tired of new areas quickly. This is probably my big issue with Utah: by the time it was released, it was surrounded by areas that I no longer wished to travel through because the quality had increased too much.

Still, both games have a pretty acceptable "baseline" quality standard - Oregon for ATS, VLF for ETS2. This hasn't really changed much in several years, and is certainly doing so at a slower rate than states are being added. While it's true that later areas are often better, most of the things that make modern maps better than the base map are present by these two packs. (By extension, Scandinavia and AZ/NM are a clear step between both their predecessors and successors.)

More specifically, the ETS2 base map was not designed to last ten years, and the ATS base map was not designed at 1:20 scale, resulting in both of these regions absolutely benefitting from a redesign for reasons that are more concrete than just "old map bad". California in particular really suffers from, frankly, bearing only a passing resemblance to CA. Compared to NV/AZ/NM, which mostly just need some polish and a handful of road adjustments, CA needs to be completely redone.
User avatar
flight50
Posts: 30154
Joined: 20 May 2017 03:33
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth, Tx - USA

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#584 Post by flight50 » 16 May 2021 13:39

I honestly think Nevada fits the California criteria for a mass redo. Majority of the roads are feasible as they just need realignment, textures, smoother curves and better banking. I-80 from California to Wells, redo all of it. Reno, Elko and Winnemucca can get makeovers since they are right off 80. Winnemucca's road layout definitely needs revamped. Not accurate at all. Sierra Nevada made a real good Winnemucca. I-15 from Vegas to California, redo all of it. Its not that much South of Vegas. California takes care of the rest of I-15.

US-95, realign it coming out of Vegas and add the missing part of US-95. All roads outside of 80 and 15, redo the mountain models along them. Add newer depots they wasn't in place before. Shouldn't be a ton of them. There is plenty of mining and several solar energy depots that can come to open up more delivery locations.

So that might be 60-75% of Nevada that I'd like to see redone. Arizona more like 45-50%. Those mountain models and other rock formations can be replaced to be more on the level of the current rock formation rocks. Phoenix can get reworked. Realign US-60 and finish US-70. Add AZ-260 or AZ-264. Both is een better. The landscaping now is just to good to keep sub-par rock formation models. California benefits from this new tool in a huge way. Nevada and Arizona should get that same love in my book. New Mexico rock formations holds up to not worry much about it. Only thing NM gets is adjustments to bring in Texas.
User avatar
Xaagon
Posts: 990
Joined: 07 May 2016 02:35
Location: Colorado Springs, CO, USA

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#585 Post by Xaagon » 16 May 2021 15:05

flight50 wrote: 16 May 2021 13:39 Nevada fits the California criteria for a mass redo. Majority of the roads are feasible as they just need realignment, textures, smoother curves and better banking.
Yes! I have rolled the truck so many times in Nevada. At the very least we need the addition of the yellow speed limit signs for the sharper curves - they could add those today before any other rework.
User avatar
Rockatansky6
Posts: 477
Joined: 29 Oct 2018 22:41
Location: Rio Grande do Sul - Brazil
Contact:

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#586 Post by Rockatansky6 » 16 May 2021 15:24

Nevada for me needs the rest of 95, Fallon added, Winnemuca, Elko and Wells redone or updated. Between Reno and Winnemuca, we have a huge area with great potential for additions, rest areas and truckstops. The rest would be textural adjustments, realignment of some roads ... Did anyone notice the "extraterrestrial highway" sign?
User avatar
Sora
Posts: 2183
Joined: 22 Feb 2017 18:47

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#587 Post by Sora » 16 May 2021 18:11

There are definitely a lot of things in NV/AZ that need to be added, redone, or changed; however, I feel like those states aren't hurt as badly by 1:35 scale because they're not dense to begin with.

The biggest casualties there are the Reno/Carson/Tahoe area and the Phoenix area, but both of those are at least functional compared to CA. And I say that as someone who wanted a NV rework before CA for I-80.
Googlefluff
Posts: 47
Joined: 21 Aug 2014 03:13

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#588 Post by Googlefluff » 16 May 2021 22:18

Sora wrote: 16 May 2021 09:12 Personally, I strongly value consistency. If an area of the game feels noticeably better or worse, I'm going to avoid one or the other. This results in the map taking on a very unsatisfying shape, though, which in turn results in me getting tired of new areas quickly. This is probably my big issue with Utah: by the time it was released, it was surrounded by areas that I no longer wished to travel through because the quality had increased too much.

Still, both games have a pretty acceptable "baseline" quality standard - Oregon for ATS, VLF for ETS2. This hasn't really changed much in several years, and is certainly doing so at a slower rate than states are being added. While it's true that later areas are often better, most of the things that make modern maps better than the base map are present by these two packs. (By extension, Scandinavia and AZ/NM are a clear step between both their predecessors and successors.)

More specifically, the ETS2 base map was not designed to last ten years, and the ATS base map was not designed at 1:20 scale, resulting in both of these regions absolutely benefitting from a redesign for reasons that are more concrete than just "old map bad". California in particular really suffers from, frankly, bearing only a passing resemblance to CA. Compared to NV/AZ/NM, which mostly just need some polish and a handful of road adjustments, CA needs to be completely redone.
This is exactly my reasoning for wanting a refresh/rebuild as well. California and Nevada in particular simply aren't as nice to drive through after spending time in the newer states. When all we had were the base states it was okay, especially since they're not bad compared to the ETS2 base map, but it brings the whole game down in my opinion when there's a noticeable quality difference. It either draws your attention and makes you think about it every time you drive though, or you avoid the area and lose a big chunk of the map. I agree that Oregon or even New Mexico levels of quality are good benchmarks to shoot for. Personally I would be happy about a rebuild like that even if it delayed future states a bit, because a rebuilt base map would be just as good as far as I'm concerned.
angrybirdseller
Posts: 3298
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
Location: Minnesota

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#589 Post by angrybirdseller » 17 May 2021 14:17

Looking at Arizona AZ-69 more trucking route than AZ-260, but you would need assets for Prescott. Truck Stops are needed on the base map which means you will need asset team, but I think be more limited of upgrade for now and incrementally add replacement assets.
User avatar
bobgrey1997
Posts: 3641
Joined: 30 Nov 2015 02:13
Location: Minnesota, Iowa, Dekotas, and Nebraska
Contact:

Re: Base Map Rebuild (CA, NV, AZ) General Discussion Thread

#590 Post by bobgrey1997 » 17 May 2021 15:48

Why would they focus on a full-scale rebuild if they will have to redo it again in the near future? The asset team makes assets for ALL of the mapping teams. We already have truck stop assets. While each truck stop may have a unique layout, the individual assets are the same as the rest. If the rebuild team needs more assets, they get them from the asset team.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion about the game”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: IHAVEADREAM2595, MattoCross, RacerToft, Rockatansky6 and 11 guests