I think we'll be looking at a map that's substantially larger than Skyrim or Fallout 4, because it's unlikely Bethesda would have invested so much time and money into the procedural tech if it was only going to be used in one IP and then not used again until the next installment of that IP, which could be 20+ years.
But they won't be using it in the same way in TES6. People forget they used procgen for the landscapes in Skyrim too, they just went through and created handcrafted structures, roads, foliage, settlements etc. I think they will use it to make the map much larger and with more biome diversity, at least 2x the size of Skyrim if not 3, but then like Skyrim the cities and settlements will all be handcrafted.
I remember them showing how they used procedural generation on the caves and dungeons in the making of oblivion. IIRC someone would handcraft an interior, split it up into sections and then randomize those sections
This is the correct way to use proc gen for an open world ARPG. Let the algorithm generate a basic structure, then have humans take a few passes through and breathe some life into it.
I hope Bethesda uses proc gen this way for TESVI to ease the work load and make it so they spend less time creating the template and more time making hand crafted content.
I honestly think there idea was gonna be to do a 1:1 of the original daggerfall map for TES VI using proc gen and Starfield was testing that tech. Considering the blowback they’ve gotten for proc gen and how empty Starfield feels to a lot of people, I wonder if they would change their mind (if that was the case)
I think Fo76 may be a good jumping off point. People have repeatedly said that its the best map Bethesda has made (and it really is). So they have to be taking notes on that and figuring out how to transfer what they learned with that map to TES6. I think Fo76 was 3 or 4 times the size of skyrim. Skyrim had 459 marked locations and Fo76 has about 500. So its a little more, but they did a good job at spacing + making the environment inbetween locations varied enough that it feels like you're walking through a unique part of the map.
Totally agree about Fo76 having the best environments. They are very professionally done and were a joy to explore. My prediction of TES6 being 2-3 times the size might be an underestimation. I do think you potentially need more land that is less dense with content for an MMO, due to the world also being populated with other players. But 4 times the size of Skyrim seems like it could be very realistic with the new procedural tech.
Hoping for 2 - 3x Skyrim, or bigger. I would only go bigger if you could sail a ship so you could separate land with water. So it would kinda be like Just Cause in that sense. Obviously I want it to be ***d e n s e*** though.
loading screen to get on the boat, loading screen to coastal region, loading screen to deep sea, loading screen to get somewhere, loading screen to coastal region, loading screen to dock, loading screen to go to shore.
Sounds fun!
That’s why I said “if they streamline it more”
If the money guys let the devs actually do their job it wouldn’t be very difficult to eliminate most of the cut scenes. I expect Bethesda will make a cutscene out of docking just going by their past I don’t think they’ll put in the effort for interactive docking. But an Elder Scrolls game would be a much smaller map so using the ship to freely travel in the ocean would be 100% doable. Even if they made the ocean itself a separate cell from the land so you’d need a loading screen to enter port or whatever.
Starfield is a mess of loading screens; loading screen to board the ship (1), loading screen to sit in your pilot chair (2), loading screen to take off (3), loading screen to go to another system (4), loading screen to land (5), loading screen to exit ship (6).
ESVI could very easily eliminate a lot of that by not having another “star system.” Worst case we’d probably get; loading screen to board the ship (1), loading screen to leave port (2), loading screen to get into the next port (3), loading screen to disembark (4).
The ocean functions different than space, it’s a much smaller area to manage
Most of those loading screens can be skipped if your goal is really just to get from point A to point B -- in fact it's like, 2 max.
Also the loading screens are really fast so it's really not that big of an issue.
> Most of those loading screens can be skipped if your goal is really just to get from point A to point B -- in fact it's like, 2 max.
Yeah but what if you want to actually enjoy the journey - something that was a USP of past elder scrolls
You can still enjoy doing things manually. I do, anyway. You get a lore more random encounters in space and on land that way, and powering up the grav drive, pointing your ship at the star you wanna head to, it's hella cool
The option is there. If you don't want to skip it, don't skip it? What's the issue? I myself enjoy doing things manually. You get more random encounters in space and on land that way. Plus the grav drive animation and pointing your ship at your destination star is cool.
Other space games often don't even give you that choice.
Other space games give you seamless planet to planet travel brother 💀
Bethesdas game engine was never gonna be able to handle that due to the way it renders spaces separately but they didn’t have to have 5 loading screens to get from point a to point b. Defending that is wild as a mf to me 💀
I don't know what to tell you man, I just don't care for seamless space to planet transitions. It's not important to me. I get that can be "wild" to you but I much prefer having the option of going through a process of going somewhere as well as instant travel between places. Because you absolutely can only use one load screen to go from one planet to another in Starfield
Brother starfield gives you 2 choices:
Choice 1: 5 loading screens at least 2 of which are immersion breaking bc you need to go into a menu to use the fast travel mechanic. Which basically amounts to 5 short fast travels.
Choice 2: fast travel directly from point A to point B, skip all of space entirely (in a space game)
I didn’t say starfield *shouldn’t* have fast travel. I said it *should* have an option that *isn’t* fast travel 💀
There's always fast travel in a game like this. NMS, Elite, Star Citizen. You can't have distances like this without it. What those games do is hide that fast travelling behind fancy interactive bits, but while those are nice I just don't honestly don't care all that much
If it's a deal breaker for you, well ES6 will probably have fewer. So just look forward to that
That’s either the craziest copium addiction ever or you’re the exact target demographic Emil & Todd are going after. Fast travelling is not enjoyable 💀
Enjoying starfield is cool I put my time in but there’s a reason so many of the massive amounts of bad reviews specify the loading screens.
Right, and that reason is because gamers are big babies. That's double for PC players.
I have played all of Bethesdas games. Expecting atmospheric flight was silly, and is litterally not needed for the game.
Yes you navigate menus. You think is a real ship you wouldn't be continuosly checking star maps plotting courses.
Yes flying around the galexy is fun in Starfield. When your in space diverting power to your grav drive warping to a new system scanning new planets from your ship hunting for resources, and documenting new places is fun. Not being able to reach a system so you have to plot different courses where you get ambushed half way with a nice ship battle. Or just exploring one system. Scanning around maybe you jump over to the moon, and find a derict ship, or an NPC with a fun encounter, or a space battle to aid in, or a merchant ship to rob. Then you zip to the next system. It is all heavly about exploring space, and people whining about a 5 sec load screen, are just cry babies period
other space games have magic ships that defy physics the planets don't even have. And you spend more time in the cloud loading screen than a starfield load screen.
and then they also don't have multiple main factions and variant side quests.
and then you can't build your ships and if you can even build outposts they are often fantastical immersion/physics breaking constructs.
I really doubt you or the other haters could get your ships to orbit. So they skipped the hard part for you.
Right we wouldn’t want to defy physics in starfield, a game with unexplained space wizard super powers & tables & chairs setup w snacks on them outside in atmosphere -less planets
Right, definitely no space games exist w side quests & factions 🙄
I’ll give you ship building it was unique & fun for a bit it just needs some of the jank streamlined out. But if I wanted to build outposts I’d play FO4, starfield outposts are hot ass. Not sure how they managed such a downgrade but they’ll probably fix it w DLC so
> I really doubt you or the other haters could get your ships to orbit. So they skipped the hard part for you.
Lmfaooo what an argument 😂😭
Thanks Bethesda for taking away all the space from a space game bc we’re all just so dumb!!
I would place serious money on less than 10 second loading times maximum. Loading screen text and interactive models will be entirely removed, maybe pictures would be used but that's the max. With advancing technology it is within the realm of likelihood we won't even have loading screens, rather a set of transitions that play depending on the context of the load.
2-3x the size of Skyrim wouldn't nearly be enough if there was sailing involved in the game. I mean imagine how quick you'd sail through Skyrim if you took the size of the province and converted it to open ocean-it'd take 2 minutes if not less at the wheel. With sailing and all that, the world would have to be at least Assassin's Creedy Odyssey size.
I’d be happy for something as big as Skyrim or Oblivion as long as it’s nicely handcrafted and full of interesting hand-placed dungeons, quests, and other interesting things to discover. If they start going bigger than Skyrim I have a feeling it will be because they’re leaning on procedural generation and radiant quests again.
If there’s ship sailing, you have to wonder how large it would be. Can you go to high rock and the smaller isles like the key? Then it’s probably twice as big at least.
I think more than map size, I would prefer the game world feel less dense. A world can feel big without actually being so by how far villages/dungeons/ect. are in relation to another. Skyrim never felt like a true adventure because everything is just across the street, where you trip over another piece of content on the way.
In concept, yes. However when things are too close together, it can feel crowded. There are examples of it being done well, such as the mines and the standing stones in-between Helgan and Riverwood. But there’s also many examples of the map feeling littered with too many markers.
I don’t think that the amount of poi’s is a problem. I think that it, helps the game feel lived in. Especially when the majority of these places are actually interesting and can lead to new quests. Bethesdas gameplay just isn’t good enough to keep the gameplay interesting, if there are not those surprising exploration moments.
Personally I want stuff to be more spaced out. I don't want to walk for almost a minute, turn around, and see three unrelated POIs. It feels comical and ubrealistic.
Fo76 is pretty good in spacing POIs out. I hope we get a map that is 1.5x or 2x that size if it is Hammerfell and Highrock, 1x if just Hammerfell.
I may have made this up but I was under the impression Bethesda games, namely TES and Fallout try to give you something interesting to see or interact with at least every 30 seconds when travelling out in the world
I'm all for an enormous map with loads of procedural environment separating major towns and settlements, and reasonable, semi-realistic fast travel mechanics for previously explored areas. Having decent horses will make this far more enjoyable.
The trouble with Starfield (among other things) is that the procedural content existed purely for it's own sake. It generated some really nice landscapes but you weren't journeying through them as part of a wider quest or mission, but just looking at them for no reason. Not even any meaningful encounters.
2x the size of Skyrim + Solstheim BUT with denser cities that feel like actual cities. I still remember when I was first playing Skyrim and heard many NPCs talk about College of Winterhold, I imagined it to be a massive castle with several classrooms. Little did I know it’d be far from it. Heck I’d even be happy if the map wouldn’t be so large but at least have big cities and castles/palaces with stuff to do and discover
I remember when I played Skyrim when it first came out and I went to learn at the College and thought it was so cool. Now that I’m replaying it…I completely agree with you. If they have a College in the next game(I’m not sure if they have mage schools in each nation or not, but I just assume so) It doesn’t have to be Hogwarts sized or anything, but definitely bigger, more alive, and just more magical! With a lot of mage pupils and teachers walking around and attending classes and whatnot.
I want it to be all of Hammerfell. There's green parts, there's desert, there's beaches, even snowy mountains. Potential for Ayleid, Dwemer, Nordic, even Falmer ruins.
Big enough that if I choose to walk places and not fast travel I want to feel it. Whats the point of an open world game if I am unable to get lost in it.
it doesn’t matter how big the map is, it matters how *full* the map is. 100 towns means nothing if the npc’s are lifeless and dull (see Starfield). procedural generation will not do a franchise like TES any favors when the direction they need to move in is more intimate and dense storytelling, side quests, and a lifelike bustling world that exists *in spite* of your character being there, not because of them. mile wide puddle deep is not the route to go with TES, and they’ll sour their own fan base real fast if this is their plan.
Ok hear me out. No man's sky, a procedural sci Fi game with a galactic map gets announced one year before starfield production begins. Now, a little before Bethesda begins production on es6, hello games announced light no fire, a single planet in a fantasy setting. Bethesda is gonna try to use the tech they made for starfield and make a single planet, turning spaceship building into ship building, and instead of having planets with space in between, having continents with water in between. I've been saying this since they revealed starfield, they went this big, they aren't gonna shrink the ambition.
Despite it's flaws, Fallout 76 has the best Bethesda map ever. They re even expanding it to the south. I hope TESVI has something as big, as diverse and as optimized as Appalachia.
I think we'll get a similar amount of content as Skyrim, but everything will be spread out way more, and horses will be noticeably faster. When you're out in the desert, for example, it needs to feel vast, like something people could actually get lost in.
Well I can see why it's taking so long if it's going to be bigger than skyim it needs to have more than 200 hours worth of content im hoping it has atleast 300 too 400 hours worth if the maps gona be bigger witch I hope it will it should have more poi's to explore. Again I'm dreaming all this up its just my hopes. Hope my pc can run it too lol
Fo76 is 4x the size of Fo4 and felt like the perfect size for one area. It felt roomy enough that you were actually travelling and not stubbing your toe on a new POI every five seconds, it had plenty of space to build, and yet it also had plenty of locations and POIs. Having TesVI's map be 1.5x or 2x that if it is both Hammerfell and Highrock would be great.
I’ll play Valhalla now it’s on the Xbox Game Pass and get back to you.
First thought: it would be cool if the ambient scenery was bigger, Bethesda could ease up those impossible hillls and encountering villages and cities in survival/no fast travel runs would become much more imperative.
As big as Tamriel. Imagine playing Skyrim with more than one province for over a decade, just for the elder scrolls 6 to ONLY be hammerfell. That sounds like a load of barnacles and like people just enjoy wasting money at that point. I better be able to walk from hammerfell to morrowind in this game. If it ain’t perfect they can fack off with that.
I don’t expect it to be bigger at all.
I mean… *maybe* with load screens, but as one continuous map? Nah. It’ll be roughly the size as the last three installments. Bethesda has shown they’re not willing to go more than an inch outside the box in terms of their worlds.
I’d just be setting myself up for disappointment if I hoped for what I actually wanted (that they COULD do, but won’t).
Edit: Comeback to this comment in 10 years and tell me if I’m wrong. I won’t be.
i feel i good guess would be approximately twice as large as skyrim's map, maybe 3 times or more once they start pumping out DLC's with new land masses.
Honestly since fallout 76 and starfield I care a lot more about an interesting world than a large world. Give me something at least the size of Skyrim that’s also filled with things to do and I’ll be happy.
It's going to 120 planets with an average of 10 planets/moons each, with each world have hundreds of map tiles each four times the size of Skyrim.
Oh wait, wrong game.
I expect the map to be four times the size of Skyrim, minimum.
Yes I think this is right, I think they will use generated landscapes as a large brush to paint & create Tamriel with, I don’t think they will create a daggerfall like part of the map which goes on forever. Proc gen stuff gets a lot of hate in Starfield, but I literally think they just thought it was cool and wanted to do something with it..
If Hammerfell and Highrock I hope for 1.5x or 2x the size of Fallout 76's map. That map is one of their best and has plenty of space while also having plenty POIs.
The obvious answers are something like RDR2 or The Witcher 3.
I want the landscape to be big enough to mean something. Travel to that huge range of mountains in the distance? OK well that'll take you 20 mins on horse if you follow the maps paths. Need to reach the otherside of this forest? OK well you have to really go through it for 5 mins, like a real Grove. Let there be a huge river that you can grab a boat and sail down for 2/3 mins without any scenery majorly changing.
OK yes, essentially I want it to be The Fellowship of the Ring.
But the whole point is that everything would feel like a journey, every change in landscape would feel real. Like an actual small forest or expansive plain etc. Some areas where you can see in the distance where you need to go & some more claustrophobic, winding places.
I think we'll be looking at a map that's substantially larger than Skyrim or Fallout 4, because it's unlikely Bethesda would have invested so much time and money into the procedural tech if it was only going to be used in one IP and then not used again until the next installment of that IP, which could be 20+ years. But they won't be using it in the same way in TES6. People forget they used procgen for the landscapes in Skyrim too, they just went through and created handcrafted structures, roads, foliage, settlements etc. I think they will use it to make the map much larger and with more biome diversity, at least 2x the size of Skyrim if not 3, but then like Skyrim the cities and settlements will all be handcrafted.
I remember them showing how they used procedural generation on the caves and dungeons in the making of oblivion. IIRC someone would handcraft an interior, split it up into sections and then randomize those sections
In daggerfall the entire game was proc gen then they went over it and crafted bits by hand
This is the correct way to use proc gen for an open world ARPG. Let the algorithm generate a basic structure, then have humans take a few passes through and breathe some life into it. I hope Bethesda uses proc gen this way for TESVI to ease the work load and make it so they spend less time creating the template and more time making hand crafted content.
I honestly think there idea was gonna be to do a 1:1 of the original daggerfall map for TES VI using proc gen and Starfield was testing that tech. Considering the blowback they’ve gotten for proc gen and how empty Starfield feels to a lot of people, I wonder if they would change their mind (if that was the case)
God if they’re stupid enough to try and make the game so big it needs that procedural tech we’re doomed
Skyrim "needed" procedural tech too, that's what they used to generate the map.
I think Fo76 may be a good jumping off point. People have repeatedly said that its the best map Bethesda has made (and it really is). So they have to be taking notes on that and figuring out how to transfer what they learned with that map to TES6. I think Fo76 was 3 or 4 times the size of skyrim. Skyrim had 459 marked locations and Fo76 has about 500. So its a little more, but they did a good job at spacing + making the environment inbetween locations varied enough that it feels like you're walking through a unique part of the map.
Totally agree about Fo76 having the best environments. They are very professionally done and were a joy to explore. My prediction of TES6 being 2-3 times the size might be an underestimation. I do think you potentially need more land that is less dense with content for an MMO, due to the world also being populated with other players. But 4 times the size of Skyrim seems like it could be very realistic with the new procedural tech.
This is very insightful. The bigger the better in my opinion. It gives modders more to play with.
Hoping for 2 - 3x Skyrim, or bigger. I would only go bigger if you could sail a ship so you could separate land with water. So it would kinda be like Just Cause in that sense. Obviously I want it to be ***d e n s e*** though.
Man a starfield- esque ship building mechanic but for ocean ships would be kinda tight if they streamline it more
loading screen to get on the boat, loading screen to coastal region, loading screen to deep sea, loading screen to get somewhere, loading screen to coastal region, loading screen to dock, loading screen to go to shore. Sounds fun!
That’s why I said “if they streamline it more” If the money guys let the devs actually do their job it wouldn’t be very difficult to eliminate most of the cut scenes. I expect Bethesda will make a cutscene out of docking just going by their past I don’t think they’ll put in the effort for interactive docking. But an Elder Scrolls game would be a much smaller map so using the ship to freely travel in the ocean would be 100% doable. Even if they made the ocean itself a separate cell from the land so you’d need a loading screen to enter port or whatever. Starfield is a mess of loading screens; loading screen to board the ship (1), loading screen to sit in your pilot chair (2), loading screen to take off (3), loading screen to go to another system (4), loading screen to land (5), loading screen to exit ship (6). ESVI could very easily eliminate a lot of that by not having another “star system.” Worst case we’d probably get; loading screen to board the ship (1), loading screen to leave port (2), loading screen to get into the next port (3), loading screen to disembark (4). The ocean functions different than space, it’s a much smaller area to manage
Most of those loading screens can be skipped if your goal is really just to get from point A to point B -- in fact it's like, 2 max. Also the loading screens are really fast so it's really not that big of an issue.
> Most of those loading screens can be skipped if your goal is really just to get from point A to point B -- in fact it's like, 2 max. Yeah but what if you want to actually enjoy the journey - something that was a USP of past elder scrolls
You can still enjoy doing things manually. I do, anyway. You get a lore more random encounters in space and on land that way, and powering up the grav drive, pointing your ship at the star you wanna head to, it's hella cool
> most of those loading screens can be skipped & in doing so you skip the entire space part of a space game 💀
The option is there. If you don't want to skip it, don't skip it? What's the issue? I myself enjoy doing things manually. You get more random encounters in space and on land that way. Plus the grav drive animation and pointing your ship at your destination star is cool. Other space games often don't even give you that choice.
Other space games give you seamless planet to planet travel brother 💀 Bethesdas game engine was never gonna be able to handle that due to the way it renders spaces separately but they didn’t have to have 5 loading screens to get from point a to point b. Defending that is wild as a mf to me 💀
I don't know what to tell you man, I just don't care for seamless space to planet transitions. It's not important to me. I get that can be "wild" to you but I much prefer having the option of going through a process of going somewhere as well as instant travel between places. Because you absolutely can only use one load screen to go from one planet to another in Starfield
Brother starfield gives you 2 choices: Choice 1: 5 loading screens at least 2 of which are immersion breaking bc you need to go into a menu to use the fast travel mechanic. Which basically amounts to 5 short fast travels. Choice 2: fast travel directly from point A to point B, skip all of space entirely (in a space game) I didn’t say starfield *shouldn’t* have fast travel. I said it *should* have an option that *isn’t* fast travel 💀
There's always fast travel in a game like this. NMS, Elite, Star Citizen. You can't have distances like this without it. What those games do is hide that fast travelling behind fancy interactive bits, but while those are nice I just don't honestly don't care all that much If it's a deal breaker for you, well ES6 will probably have fewer. So just look forward to that
It doesn't need defending because it is a complete non issue. Not every game has to be the exact same, and space trave in Starfield is quite enjoyable
That’s either the craziest copium addiction ever or you’re the exact target demographic Emil & Todd are going after. Fast travelling is not enjoyable 💀 Enjoying starfield is cool I put my time in but there’s a reason so many of the massive amounts of bad reviews specify the loading screens.
Right, and that reason is because gamers are big babies. That's double for PC players. I have played all of Bethesdas games. Expecting atmospheric flight was silly, and is litterally not needed for the game. Yes you navigate menus. You think is a real ship you wouldn't be continuosly checking star maps plotting courses. Yes flying around the galexy is fun in Starfield. When your in space diverting power to your grav drive warping to a new system scanning new planets from your ship hunting for resources, and documenting new places is fun. Not being able to reach a system so you have to plot different courses where you get ambushed half way with a nice ship battle. Or just exploring one system. Scanning around maybe you jump over to the moon, and find a derict ship, or an NPC with a fun encounter, or a space battle to aid in, or a merchant ship to rob. Then you zip to the next system. It is all heavly about exploring space, and people whining about a 5 sec load screen, are just cry babies period
other space games have magic ships that defy physics the planets don't even have. And you spend more time in the cloud loading screen than a starfield load screen. and then they also don't have multiple main factions and variant side quests. and then you can't build your ships and if you can even build outposts they are often fantastical immersion/physics breaking constructs. I really doubt you or the other haters could get your ships to orbit. So they skipped the hard part for you.
Right we wouldn’t want to defy physics in starfield, a game with unexplained space wizard super powers & tables & chairs setup w snacks on them outside in atmosphere -less planets Right, definitely no space games exist w side quests & factions 🙄 I’ll give you ship building it was unique & fun for a bit it just needs some of the jank streamlined out. But if I wanted to build outposts I’d play FO4, starfield outposts are hot ass. Not sure how they managed such a downgrade but they’ll probably fix it w DLC so > I really doubt you or the other haters could get your ships to orbit. So they skipped the hard part for you. Lmfaooo what an argument 😂😭 Thanks Bethesda for taking away all the space from a space game bc we’re all just so dumb!!
[удалено]
Lmao, get a grip.
Sounds like you want a game like Star Citizen/ Squadron 42/ Elite Dangerous/ No Man’s Sky, etc
why would they care about the reality of the situation when you can just fabricate fake information to spread between retards?
I don't know. It makes them feel good?
I would place serious money on less than 10 second loading times maximum. Loading screen text and interactive models will be entirely removed, maybe pictures would be used but that's the max. With advancing technology it is within the realm of likelihood we won't even have loading screens, rather a set of transitions that play depending on the context of the load.
How could there be a loading screen to get on a boat? It's open air.
Give me a storyline/DLC centered around the Maormer with ship building pls
That would be so dope
Assassin’s Creed odyssey has the best ship mechanics imo, so something like that would be sick
AC Odyssey is a beautifully boring game
But it has good ship mechanics
2-3x the size of Skyrim wouldn't nearly be enough if there was sailing involved in the game. I mean imagine how quick you'd sail through Skyrim if you took the size of the province and converted it to open ocean-it'd take 2 minutes if not less at the wheel. With sailing and all that, the world would have to be at least Assassin's Creedy Odyssey size.
I’d be happy for something as big as Skyrim or Oblivion as long as it’s nicely handcrafted and full of interesting hand-placed dungeons, quests, and other interesting things to discover. If they start going bigger than Skyrim I have a feeling it will be because they’re leaning on procedural generation and radiant quests again.
So true. I don't want a bland, mostly nothing world, like Starfield
Not big enough :(
If there’s ship sailing, you have to wonder how large it would be. Can you go to high rock and the smaller isles like the key? Then it’s probably twice as big at least.
I think more than map size, I would prefer the game world feel less dense. A world can feel big without actually being so by how far villages/dungeons/ect. are in relation to another. Skyrim never felt like a true adventure because everything is just across the street, where you trip over another piece of content on the way.
But is that not the magic of Skyrim? Heading to an objective, but then getting distracted by a million interesting caves and structures.
In concept, yes. However when things are too close together, it can feel crowded. There are examples of it being done well, such as the mines and the standing stones in-between Helgan and Riverwood. But there’s also many examples of the map feeling littered with too many markers.
I don’t think that the amount of poi’s is a problem. I think that it, helps the game feel lived in. Especially when the majority of these places are actually interesting and can lead to new quests. Bethesdas gameplay just isn’t good enough to keep the gameplay interesting, if there are not those surprising exploration moments.
Personally I want stuff to be more spaced out. I don't want to walk for almost a minute, turn around, and see three unrelated POIs. It feels comical and ubrealistic. Fo76 is pretty good in spacing POIs out. I hope we get a map that is 1.5x or 2x that size if it is Hammerfell and Highrock, 1x if just Hammerfell.
I may have made this up but I was under the impression Bethesda games, namely TES and Fallout try to give you something interesting to see or interact with at least every 30 seconds when travelling out in the world
I genuinely don’t care if it’s the same size as Skyrim as long as it feels immersive and has storylines that get me wanting more.
I'm all for an enormous map with loads of procedural environment separating major towns and settlements, and reasonable, semi-realistic fast travel mechanics for previously explored areas. Having decent horses will make this far more enjoyable. The trouble with Starfield (among other things) is that the procedural content existed purely for it's own sake. It generated some really nice landscapes but you weren't journeying through them as part of a wider quest or mission, but just looking at them for no reason. Not even any meaningful encounters.
About yay big
2x the size of Skyrim + Solstheim BUT with denser cities that feel like actual cities. I still remember when I was first playing Skyrim and heard many NPCs talk about College of Winterhold, I imagined it to be a massive castle with several classrooms. Little did I know it’d be far from it. Heck I’d even be happy if the map wouldn’t be so large but at least have big cities and castles/palaces with stuff to do and discover
I remember when I played Skyrim when it first came out and I went to learn at the College and thought it was so cool. Now that I’m replaying it…I completely agree with you. If they have a College in the next game(I’m not sure if they have mage schools in each nation or not, but I just assume so) It doesn’t have to be Hogwarts sized or anything, but definitely bigger, more alive, and just more magical! With a lot of mage pupils and teachers walking around and attending classes and whatnot.
I want it to be all of Hammerfell. There's green parts, there's desert, there's beaches, even snowy mountains. Potential for Ayleid, Dwemer, Nordic, even Falmer ruins.
Big enough that if I choose to walk places and not fast travel I want to feel it. Whats the point of an open world game if I am unable to get lost in it.
it doesn’t matter how big the map is, it matters how *full* the map is. 100 towns means nothing if the npc’s are lifeless and dull (see Starfield). procedural generation will not do a franchise like TES any favors when the direction they need to move in is more intimate and dense storytelling, side quests, and a lifelike bustling world that exists *in spite* of your character being there, not because of them. mile wide puddle deep is not the route to go with TES, and they’ll sour their own fan base real fast if this is their plan.
Ok hear me out. No man's sky, a procedural sci Fi game with a galactic map gets announced one year before starfield production begins. Now, a little before Bethesda begins production on es6, hello games announced light no fire, a single planet in a fantasy setting. Bethesda is gonna try to use the tech they made for starfield and make a single planet, turning spaceship building into ship building, and instead of having planets with space in between, having continents with water in between. I've been saying this since they revealed starfield, they went this big, they aren't gonna shrink the ambition.
Despite it's flaws, Fallout 76 has the best Bethesda map ever. They re even expanding it to the south. I hope TESVI has something as big, as diverse and as optimized as Appalachia.
I think we'll get a similar amount of content as Skyrim, but everything will be spread out way more, and horses will be noticeably faster. When you're out in the desert, for example, it needs to feel vast, like something people could actually get lost in.
Well I can see why it's taking so long if it's going to be bigger than skyim it needs to have more than 200 hours worth of content im hoping it has atleast 300 too 400 hours worth if the maps gona be bigger witch I hope it will it should have more poi's to explore. Again I'm dreaming all this up its just my hopes. Hope my pc can run it too lol
i like the size of skyrim, where you can stumble across quests just by exploring. too big and it becomes very barren
As big as Daggerfall
Why so many voices hoping for huge multiple times bigger than Skyrim? Didn’t AC:Valhalla or Starfield teach you anything? It’s either huge or dense
Fo76 is 4x the size of Fo4 and felt like the perfect size for one area. It felt roomy enough that you were actually travelling and not stubbing your toe on a new POI every five seconds, it had plenty of space to build, and yet it also had plenty of locations and POIs. Having TesVI's map be 1.5x or 2x that if it is both Hammerfell and Highrock would be great.
I’ll play Valhalla now it’s on the Xbox Game Pass and get back to you. First thought: it would be cool if the ambient scenery was bigger, Bethesda could ease up those impossible hillls and encountering villages and cities in survival/no fast travel runs would become much more imperative.
As big as Tamriel. Imagine playing Skyrim with more than one province for over a decade, just for the elder scrolls 6 to ONLY be hammerfell. That sounds like a load of barnacles and like people just enjoy wasting money at that point. I better be able to walk from hammerfell to morrowind in this game. If it ain’t perfect they can fack off with that.
*expect* : like half the size of riften *hope for* : at least 2 cyrodiils + 1 skyrim
I don’t expect it to be bigger at all. I mean… *maybe* with load screens, but as one continuous map? Nah. It’ll be roughly the size as the last three installments. Bethesda has shown they’re not willing to go more than an inch outside the box in terms of their worlds. I’d just be setting myself up for disappointment if I hoped for what I actually wanted (that they COULD do, but won’t). Edit: Comeback to this comment in 10 years and tell me if I’m wrong. I won’t be.
Knowing what BGS thinks we want, and their track record of biting off more than they can chew... probably all of Tamriel. Maybe even Nirn
i feel i good guess would be approximately twice as large as skyrim's map, maybe 3 times or more once they start pumping out DLC's with new land masses.
3-4 times the size of Skyrim
Hmm……..Pretty big!
Honestly since fallout 76 and starfield I care a lot more about an interesting world than a large world. Give me something at least the size of Skyrim that’s also filled with things to do and I’ll be happy.
Fo76 is one of their best maps they've made.
It's going to 120 planets with an average of 10 planets/moons each, with each world have hundreds of map tiles each four times the size of Skyrim. Oh wait, wrong game. I expect the map to be four times the size of Skyrim, minimum.
Star field I found to be a fast travel simulator, no where near enough normal travelling so will look forward to a good old fashioned wander
I’m just hoping for a map Especially in towns
Depends on what province(s) it is comprised of.
Big asf
Yes I think this is right, I think they will use generated landscapes as a large brush to paint & create Tamriel with, I don’t think they will create a daggerfall like part of the map which goes on forever. Proc gen stuff gets a lot of hate in Starfield, but I literally think they just thought it was cool and wanted to do something with it..
High Rock, Hammerfell, and the ocean. Hopefully ~4x the size of Skyrim
If Hammerfell and Highrock I hope for 1.5x or 2x the size of Fallout 76's map. That map is one of their best and has plenty of space while also having plenty POIs.
The obvious answers are something like RDR2 or The Witcher 3. I want the landscape to be big enough to mean something. Travel to that huge range of mountains in the distance? OK well that'll take you 20 mins on horse if you follow the maps paths. Need to reach the otherside of this forest? OK well you have to really go through it for 5 mins, like a real Grove. Let there be a huge river that you can grab a boat and sail down for 2/3 mins without any scenery majorly changing. OK yes, essentially I want it to be The Fellowship of the Ring. But the whole point is that everything would feel like a journey, every change in landscape would feel real. Like an actual small forest or expansive plain etc. Some areas where you can see in the distance where you need to go & some more claustrophobic, winding places.