The most fearsome environment I liked is...

http://s24.postimg.org/np03a01ad/FFXIV_1351859387.jpg
http://s27.postimg.org/58uxz8cr7/FFXIV_1351842722.jpg
http://s29.postimg.org/mckn3wkg7/FFXIV_1346234540.jpg
http://s28.postimg.org/swkat92gt/FFXIV_1347533548a.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDSVGbbW5Ro

one day~ Maybe the expansion will give us back those lovely big zones again

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ketsufuma

...those lovely big zones again

---

Big? Yes.

Lovely? I beg to differ from the plain, barren, copy-pasted landscapes I seem to remember all too well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whoopeeragon

Big? Yes.

Lovely? I beg to differ from the plain, barren, copy-pasted landscapes I seem to remember all too well.

---

Or falling through the ground, and running around and exploring the whole zone from the safety of the underground. (Mad exp yo)

Only then to realize your character is stuck and you have no way to return.

Rose tinted goggles - Check

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whoopeeragon

Big? Yes.

Lovely? I beg to differ from the plain, barren, copy-pasted landscapes I seem to remember all too well.

---

It's funny how they went to the opposite extreme with ARR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tupsi

It's funny how they went to the opposite extreme with ARR.

---

It's not funny, its PS3 limitations.

I prefer ARR's maps over Copy&Pasta 1.x.

No really the CTRL+V was to frequent.

Let's hope DX11 will give us the nice textures from 1.x back (though i doubt it but oh well...)

I liked 1.0 maps better, because they felt like a world to adventure, where civilization had only a few spots and the wilderness was harsh and dangerous, the same feel Demon/Dark souls game give. But this doesn't bode well with ARR approach and concept of being like a theme park, where everything is safe and sparkling, and filled with stuff so you can't concentrate on one thing at a time.

That said, I think a mix of both worlds could work, but I guess PS3 memory will prevent that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannythm

I liked 1.0 maps better, because they felt like a world to adventure, where civilization had only a few spots and the wilderness was harsh and dangerous.

---

Tbh, even dark souls had a better design than 1.0. 1.0 was just.... barren.

Sure it was big, but I guess if you like how 'fallout 3' was, then yeah you'd love it.
Coerthas has the best of both worlds so far imo, just needs a dangerous zone (that chasm is kind of dangerous if you were in the 30s... agroable monsters that could kill you if you fell down).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannythm

That said, I think a mix of both worlds could work, but I guess PS3 memory will prevent that.

---

There's a few things here to consider. A copy+paste region saves on memory because you're only dealing with copies of a singular element. This allows for a lot of short-cutting and quick development while minimizing costs. As everyone knows, this was the original approach. When considering memory limitations, the weakest link is your starting point. In this case, the then-planned PS3 support is why they chose the copy+paste scheme, as it would allow for dynamic loading without being resource intensive (seamless world). When the game was being rehashed to save the sinking ship, the devs decided on making more unique zones to add some realism. The downside to this method is that instead of loading a small resource that was simply copied a bunch of time, each zone is a huge resource in itself. PS3 processing power and virtual memory would not allow for dynamic loading of such zones. Due to this change, the world had to be chopped up into maps. Now the time to travel between maps is still roughly the same (since there was long corridors connecting them anyway in 1.0). The noticeable difference would simply be in map size.

In summation, as long as SE wants players on PS3 to be able to play, there are only 2 options.
A) Large copy+paste maps with few models and no seams between.
B) Small unique maps with many models and seams between.

Now, the PS4 can easily handle the current size maps and still allow for dynamic rendering (removal of seams). However, if SE would, for some reason, decide to remove the zone boundaries and start implementing even larger zones in the future (like 1.0, just without the copy+paste), this would mean anyone on a PS3 would not be able to play. The question is, "At some point in the future, would SE consider this, even if it means screwing over PS3 players?" It's true that at some point in time there will be so few PS3 players that a change over would result in negligible monetary loss. That would be our best chance of seeing a much more realistic and vibrant world. It really all depends on how long players continue to use the PS3 client.

I was expecting an Aesthetician picture. He gives me nightmares.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Staris

It's not funny, its PS3 limitations.

---

It's not even that - Players asked for this for 2.0 lol because the logic presented was: "Smaller zones = better design."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nayto

Tbh, even dark souls had a better design than 1.0. 1.0 was just.... barren.

Sure it was big, but I guess if you like how 'fallout 3' was, then yeah you'd love it.
Coerthas has the best of both worlds so far imo, just needs a dangerous zone (that chasm is kind of dangerous if you were in the 30s... agroable monsters that could kill you if you fell down).

---

You also have to take into consideration 1.0 was never finished and pretty much in all level design, it will be fairly barren from the start. Another thing a lot of people didn't realize was the 'copy paste' also was done due to the soft zoning in the "seamless world", so it kept the world looking consistent but you'll notice it when you're looking for it.