Castle Paradox

RPGrealm5

I was just thinking about overworlds the other day and something caught my interest. My games have no overworld. The world is all connected by trails and ships. The main route is teleportation.

But I know other people don't think the same as I do. What's your thought on overworlds? Do you like connected worlds, world maps in which you move from town to town on a bigger map, or a point to point map? I think point to point is pretty boring, but what do you think?
_________________
Gyu, Doh!

Iblis · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:35 am Post subject:

Personally I prefer free-roaming overworlds. The other types are too restrictive and take away from exploration.

Woo... so many polls, it's making me dizzy O_o
_________________
Locked
OHR Piano

Setu_Firestorm · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:17 pm Post subject:

Roaming overworlds are for commies and wimps.
Besides, guns don't kill people ......I do!

.................Uhhh ....just right....
_________________

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/georgerpowell
Newgrounds: http://setu-firestorm.newgrounds.com

Setu_Firestorm · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:18 pm Post subject:

Nah. I think the only reason that no one uses anything other than roaming overworlds is plainly because no one has thought of anything else.
_________________

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/georgerpowell
Newgrounds: http://setu-firestorm.newgrounds.com

RPGrealm5 · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 7:50 pm Post subject:

Setu_Firestorm: Hey, you can use Final Fantasy X as an example of connected worlds. Until you get the airship, then it shifts from point to point which is not something I think would be a good style to be used in games, because point to point limits your amount of exploration.

But yes there are other forms of Map styles out there that have worked pretty well.
_________________
Gyu, Doh!

Aethereal · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 8:07 pm Post subject:

You can do that without limiting exploration, however. You don't have to do it exactly like Final Fantasy X.
_________________

Iblis · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:10 pm Post subject:

I think the less we do things like FFX, the better. That game is a great example of what not to do.
_________________
Locked
OHR Piano

JSH357 · Joined: 02 Feb 2003 Posts: 1705

It depends on the game, really. Some games need a roaming map, some games don't. Most games benefit from having one, I think, but only because it makes getting back to places easier.

Iblis · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:31 pm Post subject:

That's true, like Secret of Mana wouldn't work well with a regular overworld map, I think.
_________________
Locked
OHR Piano

RPGrealm5 · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:39 pm Post subject:

The Secret of Mana is a great example of how good things can turn out when you use a connected map. But I think Seiken Densetsu 3 is an even better example. (For those who don't know what that is, it's the Japan exclusive Secert of Mana 2)

Seiken Densetsu 3 actually inspired me to go by the connected map method. But some games are better with overworlds like FFVI, FFV, FFIV.
One game though that would have been better with a connected map is Chrono Trigger. So JSH357 brings up a good point about that.
_________________
Gyu, Doh!

Iblis · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:49 pm Post subject:

yeah, SD3 was an awesome game.

However I think Chrono Trigger was pretty much perfect the way it was, except that Chrono didn't talk. I hate when games do that. It just prevents you from getting to know th character in a meaningful way.
_________________
Locked
OHR Piano

Setu_Firestorm · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:49 pm Post subject:

Yeah! That Secret of Mana / Metal Gear Solid thing works good, but like somebody said earlier in the thread, it depends on the game.
_________________

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/georgerpowell
Newgrounds: http://setu-firestorm.newgrounds.com

Me · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:50 pm Post subject:

I currently use a two-overworld system. The first is a map of the world that acts as the starting-off point - like the world map in FFH once you get the airship (although I did not steal the idea from Fenrir). The other overworld is made up of seperate maps for each continent. This way, I can have a huge world to play in. My first continent is larger than some world maps (270 by 45 tiles!). I like big worlds - it gives me a chance to create a really epic game.

*EDIT*
I can see that the "roaming overworld" is unoriginal and all, but we have to face it: it's a really good system.
_________________
UP DOWN UP DOWN LEFT LEFT RIGHT RIGHT A B START

JSH357 · Joined: 02 Feb 2003 Posts: 1705

Two things:

A. Secret of Mana/Seiken Densetsu II DO have overworld maps. You ride Flammie/the Turtle thing to get to anywhere you had been previously.

B. Chrono Trigger's world map is absolutely perfect the way it is- the only thing that could have made CT's map better would have been if getting from on gate to another weren't as tiresome early on. (Getting Frog's spells from the End of Time comes to mind.)

I think a good example of a game without an overworld map would be Xenosaga. There's really no purpose in going back to many places in that game, so the direct-door system suits it pretty well. (Not that Xenosaga was a fantastic game; but the map system works with it.)

Games that take place in a futuristic world tend to work better without overworld maps, as do platform games.

Iblis · Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2003 11:14 pm Post subject:

A. Yeah, but they don't have world maps you can just wander around on. You have to be riding something, and you can only leave those things at certain places.

I never actually played Xenosaga though (new games... Huh?

).
_________________
Locked
OHR Piano