Floating islands and underground tunnels

[Aodlop.1907]

Are the way forward.

Too many maps will scatter the playerbase. However, having new levels of depth to existing map is the better options.

 

Adding expansion features to Vanilla maps would also be the perfect occasion to tease new players about what's to come, since you'd need gliding/updraft or mushroom masteries at the very least to access these places.

[Linken.6345]

oh yes what we need is more spoilers on early maps great idea OP

[Fueki.4753]

I don't think the game needs even more elevation than it already has. And it certainly doesn't need another underground labyrinth like Tangled Depths.

New maps with current elevation levels (or less) are the better option.

[Danikat.8537]

Had to check which forum I was on after reading this, one of my others has been all about navigating floating islands and underground passages, because it's likely that's going to be a big part of the next Zelda game.

I agree it could be a good way to add more to the existing maps, but considering HoT had both and a lot of people complained, and still complain, that it made the maps hard to navigate and said they never want to see anything like that again I think it's unlikely Anet will do it again. Or if they do I doubt they'll be particularly complicated, there would be very simple and obvious ways to move between the levels and relatively horizontal movement within a level rather than having to keep moving between them.

Also underground passages could be difficult because even maps which don't have much water have a water table and it's often at, or just below, the surface so if you go too far down you'll be swimming.

[Ashen.2907]

If Anet did add content to existing areas in the form of underground labyrinths and floating islands I would expect them to be new zones rather than just extensions of existing map instances.

 

[Lottie.5370]

No thanks.

[Sobx.1758]

5 hours ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

Are the way forward.

Too many maps will scatter the playerbase. However, having new levels of depth to existing map is the better options.

It makes next to no difference whether the maps will get some "additional levels" in form of floating islands and underground tunnels or instead we'll get new separate maps. In fact, what you're proposing is probably worse due to increasing scattering of the players between the levels of the same map when the player cap on them remains the same.

So no, bad idea.

[Aodlop.1907]

14 hours ago, Danikat.8537 said:

but considering HoT had both and a lot of people complained

HoT had the best maps.

These people's opinions should never matter, in under any circumstances.

[yoni.7015]

I prefer new maps. 

[Lottie.5370]

1 hour ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

HoT had the best maps.

These people's opinions should never matter, in under any circumstances.

 

Glad you agree that your opinion doesn't matter.

[Hashberry.4510]

Never be another one like HoT.

[Naxian.9823]

On 9/17/2022 at 4:33 PM, Fueki.4753 said:

it certainly doesn't need another underground labyrinth like Tangled Depths.

I can understand if you don't like the map, but the map itself is a work of art and design. You have to spend way more time than on any other map in the game to learn how to navigate it, as well as to know all its hiding places.

For those of us who like to explore and get lost in a fantasy world, there are no better maps than those with verticality, secret areas and different levels.

On 9/17/2022 at 3:36 PM, Aodlop.1907 said:

Are the way forward.

Too many maps will scatter the playerbase. However, having new levels of depth to existing map is the better options.

 

Adding expansion features to Vanilla maps would also be the perfect occasion to tease new players about what's to come, since you'd need gliding/updraft or mushroom masteries at the very least to access these places.

I really like the idea of the post.

[Fueki.4753]

18 minutes ago, Naxian.9823 said:

I can understand if you don't like the map, but the map itself is a work of art and design. You have to spend way more time than on any other map in the game to learn how to navigate it, as well as to know all its hiding places.

For those of us who like to explore and get lost in a fantasy world, there are no better maps than those with verticality, secret areas and

And with the overwhelmingly negative feedback (from the part of the playerbase that actually voices opinions) it ought to be obvious that such maps are not desirable.

Exploration can very well be achieved without needlessly extended elevation. I found the PoF maps much more interesting to explore and look at many of the nooks and crannies, because it did not feel like an enormous waste of time, ending up at a dead and or already visited place most of the time. Tangled Depths and Draconis Mons, on the other hand, had almost nothing but frustrations to offer.

Edited September 18, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[Naxian.9823]

4 minutes ago, Fueki.4753 said:

And with the overwhelmingly negative feedback (from the part of the playerbase that actually voices opinions) it ought to be obvious that such maps are not desirable.

Exploration can very well be achieved without needlessly extended elevation. I found the PoF maps much more interesting to explore and look at many of the nooks and crannies, because it did not feel like an enormous waste of time, ending up at a dead and or already visited place most of the time. Tangled Depths and Draconis Mons, on the other hand, had almost nothing but frustrations to offer.

I tell you the same as the other player. Maps like this will frustrate you, but other players love them. For example, unlike you, POF maps seem bland and boring to me.

There are about ~62 maps in the game. With complex navigation there is only 1. With a certain level of verticality there will be less than 6. A little more variety is not going to hurt anyone. If you don't like them, you don't have to play them.

[Aodlop.1907]

You mention Tangled Depths as if I asked for all maps to have such levels of depth and complexity, when in reality, one layer of floating Islands would be plenty enough to achieve what I'm describing. 

It wouldn't even need to be Verdant Brinks levels of layering. 

[Sobx.1758]

36 minutes ago, Naxian.9823 said:

I can understand if you don't like the map, but the map itself is a work of art and design. You have to spend way more time than on any other map in the game to learn how to navigate it, as well as to know all its hiding places.

For those of us who like to explore and get lost in a fantasy world, there are no better maps than those with verticality, secret areas and different levels.

True, HoT maps are great and as much as TD is indeed living up to its name by being pretty confusing for some time after initial arrival, I'd say it's one of the best maps in the game.

But from my understanding that's not what OP asks about, instead he want to put new maps into old maps by adding newer "layers". And in that case it doesn't seem like it would achieve what OP wants it to achieve. It would probably do the opposite.

[mungozen.2379]

On 9/17/2022 at 6:36 AM, Aodlop.1907 said:

Are the way forward.

Too many maps will scatter the playerbase. However, having new levels of depth to existing map is the better options.

 

Adding expansion features to Vanilla maps would also be the perfect occasion to tease new players about what's to come, since you'd need gliding/updraft or mushroom masteries at the very least to access these places.

I don't follow the logic or goal here.

A 'low level' player gains no benefit from this scenario.  How does having 'high level' players in an inaccessible part of the map do anything for anyone really?  It isn't like the high level players would share any content with the lower level players.

We already have complaints when high level players come to lowbie areas to work on achievements and events.  It makes the game harder for the low level players to actually play or enjoy when high level players are competing with them for the same content.  By bringing high level players into low level areas you could end up with more of these issues.

I also don't think new players need to be looking down the road so much as focusing on the content right in front of them.  Like, sure Gliding and Mounts are cool but right now I gotta win the Snaff prize...  and the game should cater to what the player is doing right now, make whatever it is interesting and engaging.

So I don't think adding now layers to existing maps is doing anything positive.  Rather, I think that new maps designed to have more replayability would be interesting.  Part of the reason many maps are dead is due to a lack of content (ahem, hello EoD maps, you barren wastelands).  Sure slapping mobs and NPC's everywhere is fine but, we live in the age of flying mounts and bypassing that stuff.  Without Adventures, Bounties, Meta Events, Achievements we have no reason to be there.  Even when those reasons are present, most players will only do them a handful of times to complete an achieve and then move on.

Which, going back to your original idea, even if they added floating islands and tunnels to existing maps, once the content has been done, it too would end up dead.

At least with new maps when they make a mistake, we don't have to keep going back there once we are done with it.

[Fueki.4753]

59 minutes ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

You mention Tangled Depths as if I asked for all maps to have such levels of depth and complexity, when in reality, one layer of floating Islands would be plenty enough to achieve what I'm describing. 

It wouldn't even need to be Verdant Brinks levels of layering. 

They certainly could do it like Bloodstone Fen. But what kind of reason would exist to suddenly have debris floating around in old maps? I certainly wouldn't like an even like Bloodstone magic suddenly causing debris floating every, because a new plot twist tells us that Aurene can't filter (Human) God magic, only suck it up and then let it back out.

Also, many people might not like simply having things stacked onto old maps.

And then you have to consider the borders of the maps that are limiting on how much you could actually traverse. There is next to no space below most maps, so they'd have to remake the map with a new underground in mind. Likewise, for floating debris, they would have to recreate with a higher ceiling and patch up the broken parts they sealed off with invisible walls.

And then there also are the areas above Jumping Puzzles to consider, which would have to be addressed, so people can't just drop down and hope people revive them.

With all these considerations, it might be easier to just make new maps, which offer new things on every layer.

Edited September 18, 2022 by Fueki.4753

[Ausar.9542]

On 9/17/2022 at 9:36 AM, Aodlop.1907 said:

Are the way forward.

Too many maps will scatter the playerbase. However, having new levels of depth to existing map is the better options.

 

Adding expansion features to Vanilla maps would also be the perfect occasion to tease new players about what's to come, since you'd need gliding/updraft or mushroom masteries at the very least to access these places.

good idea

[Redfeather.6401]

If they added floating islands to some of the core maps that you could jump off and sky dive down from that would be cool. Like how in Heart of Thorns you could get to the canopy level and jump down. It was so far.

[lezbefriends.7516]

A little bit too creative.

[Doggie.3184]

And I have just the thing for you. XD

 

[Gryphon.2875]

42 minutes ago, Doggie.3184 said:

And I have just the thing for you. XD

 

We had those in Nightfall.

[Aodlop.1907]

12 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

A 'low level' player gains no benefit from this scenario. 

I disagree again. You could design cooperative events which would allow the players on the ground to contribute to what's happening up there, with the end result being a final world boss dropping from one of the islands to be attacked by everybody for example.

[mungozen.2379]

7 minutes ago, Aodlop.1907 said:

I disagree again. You could design cooperative events which would allow the players on the ground to contribute to what's happening up there, with the end result being a final world boss dropping from one of the islands to be attacked by everybody for example.

So adding new meta events to core maps?  I’m all for it, but why make part of it restricted in such a way?  Assuming that they could figure out how to make it work, what does it really add to the game?  It’s another meta.  How does it enliven older zones for more than 10 minutes every 2-4 hours?

And, take a second to consider what a ‘lower level’ player looks like today in a post leveling guide achievement world. It takes less than 20 hours to level to 80 with the new guide not using any additional boosts. Players won’t be low level long enough to take advantage of more Core content anyways.