Physical Map

[Craig 2,147,483,647]

Here's a high zoom render

 

Linky

 

 

[Craig 2,147,483,647]

And a low zoom render

 

Linky

 

 

[Aristoteles 286]

Craig, I'm assuming you like this idea. Is there any chance of us seeing this feature in the future?

[Craig 2,147,483,647]

I'm not convinced it's a worthwhile feature yet.

 

Convince me.

[Aristoteles 286]

I'm not convinced it's a worthwhile feature yet.

 

Convince me.

 

A map that allows for players to navigate the HUGE world of TM.

If my math is correct, 758 blocks wide and tall multiplied by 15 is around 11,000 blocks wide and tall. Which will be the world size in 1.5. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

Navigating in the world size of 1.1 is hard enough, with out getting lost. With such a large world a map would cut down hugely on the marco-polo games people would need to play in order to find one another. Plus it would be priceless in RPG maps. Players (me included) often build towns/villages for away from one another to allow some threat to the player. But with such vast voids in between places players will get lost, and most likely never find their way back. At least not for a while. Such a wonderful feature would add countless RPG possibles and make navigating such a vast world much easier. But will also keep the player vulnerable to attacks because they're standing still and the map takes up their whole screen.

 

That's why it's worth it :)

RPG maps are dominate for right now, they're the most popular and such a feature would make a lot of people happy.

BU T would also allow us not to be forced to play Marco-Polo when we want to navigate. The map so it's not over powered can have a set view distance. Meaning it can only see so far, if the player wants to see more on the map he/she will have to move into the direction. That way the map is useful and won't kill the sense of getting lost.

[Craig 2,147,483,647]

If my math is correct, 758 blocks wide and tall multiplied by 15 is around 11,000 blocks wide and tall. Which will be the world size in 1.5. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

That's wrong.

 

We said the Survival map surface size is 16 times bigger than the Dig Deep surface size.

 

Dig Deep surface size is 256 x 256.

The Survival map size was to be 1024 x 1024. That's 16 times bigger than 256 x 256. 4 times wider and 4 times longer (4 x 4 = 16).

 

1024 x 1024 is a lot smaller than 11,000 x 11,000, but still quite large.

 

Nb. The Survival map size will actually be a little bit smaller than that.

 

There is no Survival in 1.5, but in 1.5 you can now specify the size of new Creative map's, and one of those sizes is 1024 x 1024.

 

I'm not saying this invalidates your idea's, I'm just correcting wrong information, so that you can rethink if the physical map is still worth it.

 

One thing I am concerned about is if the map will make certain aspects of the game far too easy.

[ewan_f 4]

That's wrong.

 

We said the Survival map surface size is 16 times bigger than the Dig Deep surface size.

 

Dig Deep surface size is 256 x 256.

The Survival map size was to be 1024 x 1024. That's 16 times bigger than 256 x 256. 4 times wider and 4 times longer (4 x 4 = 16).

 

1024 x 1024 is a lot smaller than 11,000 x 11,000, but still quite large.

 

Nb. The Survival map size will actually be a little bit smaller than that.

 

There is no Survival in 1.5, but in 1.5 you can now specify the size of new Creative map's, and one of those sizes is 1024 x 1024.

 

I'm not saying this invalidates your idea's, I'm just correcting wrong information, so that you can rethink if the physical map is still worth it.

 

One thing I am concerned about is if the map will make certain aspects of the game far too easy.

What about when you release 2.0? Could it be implemented into the game somehow? I think we will need some way of navigating a huge map without any significant reference points

[Aristoteles 286]

That's wrong.

 

We said the Survival map surface size is 16 times bigger than the Dig Deep surface size.

 

Dig Deep surface size is 256 x 256.

The Survival map size was to be 1024 x 1024. That's 16 times bigger than 256 x 256. 4 times wider and 4 times longer (4 x 4 = 16).

Nb. The Survival map size will actually be a little bit smaller than that.

 

There is no Survival in 1.5, but in 1.5 you can now specify the size of new Creative map's, and one of those sizes is 1024 x 1024.

 

I'm not saying this invalidates your idea's, I'm just correcting wrong information, so that you can rethink if the physical map is still worth it.

 

Whoops... I made an epic fail.

I don't know now, I thought the worlds would be a lot bigger. Would definitely be cool, but as the world sizes are (1024 x 1024) it's not really needed.

Would be useful in future updates when the world is bigger. Bigger = harder to navigate.

As the world size stands (1.5 size) it's not needed, but would be very cool for RPG maps. But not needed until the world size is much bigger.

 

When it comes down to it, it's up to you :) Do you think we need this now, which would serve no purpose other then making RPG maps much easier to find stuff. Stuff that can be found just by looking around the map for a minute. I'd say as the size stands now, no. We do not need it yet, in the future we will though ;)

[Craig 2,147,483,647]

What about when you release 2.0? Could it be implemented into the game somehow? I think we will need some way of navigating a huge map without any significant reference points

 

Could what be implemented into the game?

[Vox Pixuli 163]

Even looking at Craigs renders, I still can't see it working. I am not a fan of the current map at all, however the current map shows depth well. I think this new style would confuse people. I think this may be a good idea for survival, as It would be harder to locate the diamond you need for that D.sword if you didn't have the current map that easily shows blocks near to you at depth.

Also, maybe in survival the map could need to be crafted and then would just appear on the screen? Or as a physical item as the opening post said. That would be cool.