If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
- Calibuddy99
- Posts: 327
- Joined: 19 Mar 2022 19:38
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
Well, it would actually take 8 years to make texas on a 1:10 scale probably because of the extra things that would be neccesary.
Nothing to say here anymore.
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
Only time it would be okay to take Texas 8 years or so is if its the only state and that is the game. Its totally unacceptable for ATS though. People know good and well they are not okay waiting 8 years for Texas. They are already impatient at 3.5 years at 1:20 scale. Sometimes you have to put practical ahead of desire. I don't care how many people you throw at Texas, but it coming in less than 12 months at anything larger than 1:35.
My post are only thoughts and ideas. Don't assume it makes ATS.
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
Texas has roughly 261,914 dry land sq. miles compared to Rhode Island's 1,034 dry land sq. miles, can you imagen the response from players in Rhode Island when SCS finally get's there and it only has one city to pickup and deliver to at the current scale?
"Gamers Are Not Beta Testers"
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
Check ETS with Luxemburg, 1 city, 998 sqmi. No revolution that I heard of.
Belgium 2 cities. 11850 sqmi. They complain about Antwerp, meaning 3 would be gladily accepted.
Now to clarify my position: when I'm advocating 1:15 or 1:10, I am thinking specifically about increasing the space between the cities.
Not at all getting more or larger settlements. Towns are already about 1:3, that's fine.
Just miles of empty forests or fields to increase the feeling of space and distance between road exchanges.
Not a single 3D artist or programmer involved.
Belgium 2 cities. 11850 sqmi. They complain about Antwerp, meaning 3 would be gladily accepted.
Now to clarify my position: when I'm advocating 1:15 or 1:10, I am thinking specifically about increasing the space between the cities.
Not at all getting more or larger settlements. Towns are already about 1:3, that's fine.
Just miles of empty forests or fields to increase the feeling of space and distance between road exchanges.
Not a single 3D artist or programmer involved.
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
When its comes to the East coast, obviously SCS will have to thoroughly think things thru. Many cuts will have to be made. I think size is being blown out of proportion for ATs honestly. If more reference to what is done in ETS2 are made, I think people will understand better at how things will come for ATS considering the games are build on the same engine. ETS2 is 1:19 and ATS is 1:20 so that makes a small difference too. But if it doesn't fit in ETS2, how can it fit at the same scale in ATS for a state that is similar sized to an ETS2 country. If ETS2 doesn't increase in scale, how do people expect ATS to go thru yet another rescale?
Here is a Belgium reference. Luxemburg is smaller than R.I. We can't expect more than Providence there. Newport is possible if SCS was bold enough to use the water as part of the map. If R.I. could be distorted a bit into the water, Newport is possible. There are many other reference one can make with small US states compared to small countries that have made the ETS2 map.
[ external image ]
Here is a Belgium reference. Luxemburg is smaller than R.I. We can't expect more than Providence there. Newport is possible if SCS was bold enough to use the water as part of the map. If R.I. could be distorted a bit into the water, Newport is possible. There are many other reference one can make with small US states compared to small countries that have made the ETS2 map.
[ external image ]
My post are only thoughts and ideas. Don't assume it makes ATS.
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
do not forget one minor thing. the map is area.
if the rescaled version should have comparable density, then scale increase would increased the work by square, 1:15 is roughly 2x more work, 1:10 is 4x more work, 1:5 is 16x more work.
on the other hand, the scale 1:20 means we need to choose 1 item from 400 to put into map. other 399 must be thrown away. and with that we need to keep spirit of the place, hiway/cities logic, industry, ...etc. it's quite tough.
yes, theoretically it is possible to make map more sparse, but it does not work actually. either players will object that many things are not there and could be (and it would be true) or mappers themselves will just want to use free space to have cities nicer and bigger (like bit more american). human factor is understandable and kind of funny .. except the part where it might be frustrating ..
othwerwise this is really interesting topic - to see opinions and arguments of player base about even such core concept.
thanks everyone.
if the rescaled version should have comparable density, then scale increase would increased the work by square, 1:15 is roughly 2x more work, 1:10 is 4x more work, 1:5 is 16x more work.
on the other hand, the scale 1:20 means we need to choose 1 item from 400 to put into map. other 399 must be thrown away. and with that we need to keep spirit of the place, hiway/cities logic, industry, ...etc. it's quite tough.
yes, theoretically it is possible to make map more sparse, but it does not work actually. either players will object that many things are not there and could be (and it would be true) or mappers themselves will just want to use free space to have cities nicer and bigger (like bit more american). human factor is understandable and kind of funny .. except the part where it might be frustrating ..
othwerwise this is really interesting topic - to see opinions and arguments of player base about even such core concept.
thanks everyone.
Nobody can tell you anything about it. Those who know about it aren't allowed to talk. And those who talk know nothing.
- SouthernMan
- Posts: 885
- Joined: 07 Jun 2021 19:38
- Location: Pilgrim on Earth
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
Currently, if I were to make a map I would do 1:1 or 1:4/5. Once a friend "discovered" this option and shared it with me, making full-scale maps becomes interesting. However, if I were a map developer, I would go for an interstate-only map:
[ external image ]
[ external image ]
Study will not always make you wise, sometimes it will simply make you more superb.
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
Ah oh, you guys got Max reading now, lol. Thanks for chiming in Max.
I, like many others want to see the US built sooner than later while at the same time, maintaining the same quality we have now. 2x the work still isn't good. Beyond that is crazy long waits. If we did get a 1:10 map, you guys can't honestly tell me you are okay waiting for a map that takes 4x as long. So Wyoming, Colorado, Montana...instead of 12 months getting the dlc, you all are okay waiting 4 years? For those states? Then Texas, its already 3.5 years in. But the time it releases it could be or just shy of 4 years. So you are cool waiting 16 years for Texas? I dooon't think so. Think about what's being asked hear. I get everyone wants more space but there is a practical side to it...... Long dev time and no one will be happy with that....no one. People already complain it takes to long even at 12 months for states.
I'd love to see Canada and Mexico in ATS. Move the scale and we can kiss those good bye. I surely hope SCS never considers this. Not with ATS. Perhaps ATS2 but not now. ATS 2 fill in extra mixed stuff but its not the time. I doubt I'd see ATS2 in my gaming years though. I'd rather not depend on ProMods and Reforma either. I wan't SCS stuff. Mods recycle already made content from either SCS games that wasn't even made for areas SCS has not even mapped. Nothing is custom made to replicate the exact same buildings with mods. I'd rather have replicated buildings and that's pretty much what SCS goes for. The main focus buildings are pretty spot on.
I, like many others want to see the US built sooner than later while at the same time, maintaining the same quality we have now. 2x the work still isn't good. Beyond that is crazy long waits. If we did get a 1:10 map, you guys can't honestly tell me you are okay waiting for a map that takes 4x as long. So Wyoming, Colorado, Montana...instead of 12 months getting the dlc, you all are okay waiting 4 years? For those states? Then Texas, its already 3.5 years in. But the time it releases it could be or just shy of 4 years. So you are cool waiting 16 years for Texas? I dooon't think so. Think about what's being asked hear. I get everyone wants more space but there is a practical side to it...... Long dev time and no one will be happy with that....no one. People already complain it takes to long even at 12 months for states.
I'd love to see Canada and Mexico in ATS. Move the scale and we can kiss those good bye. I surely hope SCS never considers this. Not with ATS. Perhaps ATS2 but not now. ATS 2 fill in extra mixed stuff but its not the time. I doubt I'd see ATS2 in my gaming years though. I'd rather not depend on ProMods and Reforma either. I wan't SCS stuff. Mods recycle already made content from either SCS games that wasn't even made for areas SCS has not even mapped. Nothing is custom made to replicate the exact same buildings with mods. I'd rather have replicated buildings and that's pretty much what SCS goes for. The main focus buildings are pretty spot on.
My post are only thoughts and ideas. Don't assume it makes ATS.
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
Poll: Choose Next 2 ATS States
ATS Flatbed
ATS Special Transport
North American Agriculture
Poll: Out of Production Truck
-
- Posts: 4784
- Joined: 26 Sep 2019 20:14
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
This is also based on current mapping techniques: what @SouthernMan is showing reduces terrain creation to a matter of minutes. Instead of the SCS team modeling a peak, they could just use sat data for it.flight50 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2022 19:16
I, like many others want to see the US built sooner than later while at the same time, maintaining the same quality we have now. 2x the work still isn't good. Beyond that is crazy long waits. If we did get a 1:10 map, you guys can't honestly tell me you are okay waiting for a map that takes 4x as long. So Wyoming, Colorado, Montana...instead of 12 months getting the dlc, you all are okay waiting 4 years? For those states? Then Texas, its already 3.5 years in. But the time it releases it could be or just shy of 4 years. So you are cool waiting 16 years for Texas? I dooon't think so. Think about what's being asked hear. I get everyone wants more space but there is a practical side to it...... Long dev time and no one will be happy with that....no one. People already complain it takes to long even at 12 months for states.
That would certainly save time.
- SouthernMan
- Posts: 885
- Joined: 07 Jun 2021 19:38
- Location: Pilgrim on Earth
Re: If you were the developer, what scale would you make the map?
Yep. I must say that, in addition to being as close as possible to the real relief/terrain, it is something that is done very quickly. But at the current scale of SCS, this is not feasible.seriousmods wrote: ↑16 Jul 2022 19:26This is also based on current mapping techniques: what @SouthernMan is showing reduces terrain creation to a matter of minutes. Instead of the SCS team modeling a peak, they could just use sat data for it.flight50 wrote: ↑16 Jul 2022 19:16
I, like many others want to see the US built sooner than later while at the same time, maintaining the same quality we have now. 2x the work still isn't good. Beyond that is crazy long waits. If we did get a 1:10 map, you guys can't honestly tell me you are okay waiting for a map that takes 4x as long. So Wyoming, Colorado, Montana...instead of 12 months getting the dlc, you all are okay waiting 4 years? For those states? Then Texas, its already 3.5 years in. But the time it releases it could be or just shy of 4 years. So you are cool waiting 16 years for Texas? I dooon't think so. Think about what's being asked hear. I get everyone wants more space but there is a practical side to it...... Long dev time and no one will be happy with that....no one. People already complain it takes to long even at 12 months for states.
That would certainly save time.
Study will not always make you wise, sometimes it will simply make you more superb.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Kaleidescoop, Spooks and 13 guests