thumbs up if you miss 1.0 graphics and open world! ^_^

[Pinworms]

For the most part a forest "looks" the same if you just generally glance at it, and you can get lost in it. It's when you really start to look at the forest's individual characteristics that you will find individualality.

A game needs to find common ground from nature and a balance of of imitating it without heavy copy past or making each individual tree, shrub, etc to pull off a well executed area.

Both versions are too skewed. 1.0 we got lost in, was huge, and great... Until people noticed the copy past. 2.0 has a small world feeling, but every rock is different. Now because of this extreme, the game had to be instanced to hold the information.

I just wish SE could find the balance.

[ToraoKoga]

For the most part a forest "looks" the same if you just generally glance at it, and you can get lost in it. It's when you really start to look at the forest's individual characteristics that you will find individualality.

A game needs to find common ground from nature and a balance of of imitating it without heavy copy past or making each individual tree, shrub, etc to pull off a well executed area.

Both versions are too skewed. 1.0 we got lost in, was huge, and great... Until people noticed the copy past. 2.0 has a small world feeling, but every rock is different. Now because of this extreme, the game had to be instanced to hold the information.

I just wish SE could find the balance.

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/6...pypasta002.jpg

Kinda like this in 1.0? It may have contributed to a "world to get lost in".

Sometimes I wonder if 1.0 and 2.0 maps are actually the same size except that 2.0 maps weren't bounded unlike 1.0 maps.

We also have a jumping feature and faster sprinting so I wonder they contributed, to 2.0 small world