Poll: Choose (3) States you would like to see next
- Vinnie Terranova
- Posts: 5064
- Joined: 09 Nov 2017 10:24
- Location: Netherlands
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
I'm not so sure about bundled states DLCs; there is no reason to bundle several states. Small states can have a lower price tag, like €8,-. Besides that, if we have 4 single state DLCs in a year, we won't have to wait too long for the next state to release. Remember the time we had to wait for Iberia? Remember the time we had to wait for Wyoming? I don't want to wait that long anymore. I would rather have more single state DLCs released in shorter time periods than having to wait longer for bundled states DLCs to release.
- xXCARL1992Xx
- Posts: 16461
- Joined: 17 Aug 2016 12:18
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
there wont be 4 states a year, just because they get smaller doesnt mean they take less time, so they would need 5 mapping teams at least to the 3 we already have, also bundles states get the map faster done then single ones, SCS wont go an start to add states cheaper in price just to keep them singled out, they will bundle them
the wait fir Wyoming has no meaning for future DLCs, the other DLCs dont have to deal with a pandemic in the middle of developing it
the wait fir Wyoming has no meaning for future DLCs, the other DLCs dont have to deal with a pandemic in the middle of developing it
| !!!NO SUPPORT OR REQUESTS OF ANY SORT VIA PM!!! | Screenshot Thread | Steam Workshop | World of Trucks Profil |
[ external image ]
[ external image ]
-
- Posts: 3300
- Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
- Location: Minnesota
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
Think 30 out of 49 states will be solo releases.Trucker_Tommy wrote: ↑19 Sep 2021 10:52 All states until we get to the east coast and up into New England will in my opinion be single state releases.
Bundles Texas size won't happen if bundle do happen they will be size of Utah with two states combined. Can't see Illinois and Wisconsin bundle way too much work.
Three map DLC a year is doable, but the map 48 state map won't be completed till 2032-2035
Three map DLC a year is possible, but not for next three years as base-map will be upgraded and once Texas is done they will send some people to help on Montana and one to help the base map. The remainder on new map which likely Oklahoma or Louisiana.
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
At a certain point fragmentation may start making things more troublesome than easier. With states getting smaller, it will probably be faster and more convenient to plan out, develop, test and release them in bundles rather than separately, especially if there would be different teams working on neighbouring small states.
-
- Posts: 2141
- Joined: 27 Feb 2021 10:29
- Location: Trenčín, Slovensko
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
I think when we get to the middle of the USA, the states will be issued several times in one DLC, when Texas Montana comes out, we will get Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota separately, and the states east of these will be issued several times. in one DLC
-
- Posts: 3300
- Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
- Location: Minnesota
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, Illinios, Michigan these are solo DLC, the southern, Ohio Valley, East Coast will more likely be bundles. Florida and Geogria could be released seperate states as they are large as Washington.
-
- Posts: 331
- Joined: 12 May 2018 13:43
- Location: UK
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
@angrybirdseller that’s why I think all states up to east coast and New England will be single releases. States like Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin are too big to bundle. I’d even say Florida is too big. I’d go with state bundles above New York State for bundling so getting states out quicker I reckon 3 teams would be required.
-
- Posts: 3300
- Joined: 05 Feb 2013 05:16
- Location: Minnesota
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
Agreed, Arizona at 1:35 could fit 16 cities Florida have no problems with 12-14 in game cities, same with the states mentioned above. Realistically, think 2032-2035 is when the lower 48 completion time, but will shift to building Canada before they complete the USA lower 48 as land remaining wont be large enough for three map teams. Once, Texas and Montana are completed along with base map rebuild think will get more content sooner, but I do not think this will happen till 2023 or later time frame.
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
With the current scale, I wonder how they'll plan to address states like Rhode Island or to a lesser degree, Delaware.
Rhode island is something like 1,200 sq miles. Delaware 1,900-ish. Even Connecticut is small at 5,500 square miles. A far cry from the 100,000+ square mile states being built right now for the game. I get bundling, but rhode island will be lucky to get two cities. LOL. You'll drive across it in 30 seconds. Even bundling them together, the sheer small-ness of them will make it hard to give them any kind of distinguishing feel or landmarks.
Rhode island is something like 1,200 sq miles. Delaware 1,900-ish. Even Connecticut is small at 5,500 square miles. A far cry from the 100,000+ square mile states being built right now for the game. I get bundling, but rhode island will be lucky to get two cities. LOL. You'll drive across it in 30 seconds. Even bundling them together, the sheer small-ness of them will make it hard to give them any kind of distinguishing feel or landmarks.
Re: Poll: Choose (2) States you would like to see next
Every trick in the book will help. Exaggerated curves to fit longer roads in smaller space, significant scenery overlap via cutplane magic (there are some interesting examples of this in Washington), reducing cities to very few select industries on the outskirts, and, if it comes to the worst, they might have to distort the background map juuuuust a little bit in the east, borrowing some space from the Atlantic and the sparsely populated regions of Canada to slightly inflate the smaller states.
If we could fantasize for a moment, what we really need is seamless portals, so that a tricky area could indeed be mapped in a larger scale elsewhere but connected to the rest of the map without making the player go through a ferry loading screen. The mapping possibilities then would be endless. It is certainly technologically possible - Portal the game is now what, 14 years old? - but somehow I doubt SCS will implement this.
If we could fantasize for a moment, what we really need is seamless portals, so that a tricky area could indeed be mapped in a larger scale elsewhere but connected to the rest of the map without making the player go through a ferry loading screen. The mapping possibilities then would be endless. It is certainly technologically possible - Portal the game is now what, 14 years old? - but somehow I doubt SCS will implement this.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bobcat59, EllieODaire, Kaleidescoop, Kistk3, SuchManor and 18 guests