I would probably go small. Its the little things that make RPGs so intriguing and unique. How would you like your world, extrapolate further then just the size, talk about mountains, mines, rivers, caves, mills and other unique locations.

With extra detail and a side of better icons.

Why do huge and detailed have to be mutually exclusive?

Huge map with lots of detail

Pretty much the Oblivion Color Map mod. Large, colored, pretty.

It is impossible to have a huge map with the level of detail I am talking about. Were talking "just cause 2" big, with fully unique buildings you can go in, and secret quest. That just can't happen on this generations consoles.

Medium, if we can't get huge and detailed.

I think he means the actual game, not the travel map. The game was confirmed to be the same size as oblivion. As for maps, i hope we get a nice topographical map.

Yes! I remember playing that mod for ages and then when I played the Xbox version, I was like... erm what's wrong with my eyes?
It then snapped that the map by default is void of colour, detail and just pretty horrible.

Colour for sure!



What can't happen on consoles? A detailed map? Why not, its a MAP not a high res texture pack. Just Cause 2 was on consoles and the map was detailed. Secret quest?

Yeah I'd like a medium, and can I get fries with that?

Ooh and a medium coke too.

RDR.

Huge ammounts of detail, huge world.

That's my vote

Because the bigger you're map is, the more work it takes to design the whole thing, especially when it's all hand crafted, as Skyrim will be. A larger map means more locations across the world to design, and in an open world game, you can't just work on the places of note and neglect everything in between, you have to ensure that the whole map has enough detail that it doesn't become monotonous or test the players' suspension of disbelief. Now, this isn't to say that a large world must always be boring, but as a general rule, the bigger you're gameworld is, the harder it is to ensure that each location in it will be detailed enough and diverse enough.

Though it seems to me that the poll is flawed in that it fails to define "large", "medium" and "small". Because those words are kind of abstract terms, just how large qualifies as "large"?

Of course, no matter what we say now, we already know the map is about the same size as Oblivion, and Bethesda isn't going to suddenly change that just because some fans say it should be a different size.

As for what I want, I'd rather have a detailed world at the expense of size than a massive one at the expense of quality, if I have to choose. Not to say I don't like both, if we can have them, but I wouldn't want to play in a world that's massive but boring. Though at the same time, the game world can't be TOO small, as even if you can't make it as big as the province is in lore, you want to maintain the illusion that the scale of the world is plausible. For that purpose, I am content with the scale Bethesda is going for in Skyrim, as long as the world is detailed enough and varied enough to keep me interested in exploring it.



While Just Cause 2 had a pretty impressive level of detail for a gameworld of its size, I'd say it's not the level of detail and uniqueness Bethesda is probably aiming for in Skyrim. For one thing, you couldn't enter the various buildings in the game, and there was lerss small clutter than you'd expect to find in the Elder Scrolls. And the random people you'd see on the street were all generic pedestrians that were spawned, not unique, hand placed NPCs. And those aren't criticisms, for the kind of game it was, that worked pretty well for it. However, I don't think it's fair to expect the same map scale from the Elder Scrolls without coming at the sacrifice of detail and variety.

If you mean in-game map, then its the same or nearly the same as oblivions size (been confirmed)

Read the first post, again if you have already. The title is misleading. Talking about the world here not the in game map.

I play xbox,but i've seen that mod....looks great...i'm with you on this.
I wouldn't mind the map being all black at first,then you uncover it,the more you explore.

Sorry nevermind

You missed the "other" option.

An "Other" should be automatic, people often create very biased polls some times with out even meaning to, other would correct that. Sure there would be some rare poles were it might not makes sense, but it would not hurt the poll in anyway.
At least half the polls here are nearly worthless due to there poor wording,being biased,etc. An "Other" option would would be good for everyone, as some polls people would be interested in, yet the poll is flawed so they can't get the true info they want and the poll is already made, so making another would just get it closed.

Lol I thought it meant map as in map, not world. While I would kill for Large and Well detailed, I'd rather go straight for medium so we don't get skimpy content. The thing that people fail to realize about games like JC2 and RDR is there are few objects that are interactable in the way objects are in TES. Their AI is also very poor too. They chose large, pretty worlds instead of a lot of stuff to do. Sure they have quite a few things to do but you can only shoot the two fleeing captives that you randomly find in RDR wilderness so many times until it is boring.

i agree with you good sir but you'll have to ask your self do u want to wait longer for the game because if they arn't exclusive the date would definitely have to be put back the date considerably personly i would wait for aslong as it would take

I loved the Morrowind Map, you could see the approximate location of shipwrecks and daedric ruins, and the then try to navigate towards them in-game.

Huge. Detailed areas around towns and important places, and "auto gen" for the rest. Means you'd have to be a very persistent explorer to find anything by chance. Dungeon entrances would be far easier to hide, and towns are more naturally separated.

The Takistan map in Arma2 Operation Arrowhead is "only" 13 x 13 km = 169 km2 (8 x 8 miles = 65 sq miles), but it allows/have "natural looking mountains" of 700 meters (maximum height difference). In fantasy you can exaggerate features, but not to the extent it's done in TES and FONV(/FO3). The slopes roads are put on, is just horrible and too extreme.
http://www.airpressuretendency.net/gwac/camp/system/application/views/images/takistan_karte_midsize.jpg

So with a huge map, we get:
+ Less condensed.
+ Natural features. Mountains looking like actual mountains.
+ Gradual blending of natural features. From volcanic tundra to ice caps in a 100 meters? Please...
+ More natural time. Time passes on waaay too fast to my liking to make up for lack of size.
- Less beauty showing up at the same time. Beautifulness takes another form than we're used to.

So I would like a massive world of about 100 x 100 km. Still way below Daggerfall and Blade of Destiny of course.

Um... how about huge with a large amount of detail.

I would like the map to be more like the Morrowind map and NOTHING like the Oblivion map. The way Morrowind forced the player to explore and opened up detail as you travelled allowed for some great immersion in game-play and made some quests truly epic in scale and longevity. OB's map lead the player around the game world and made some quests, which should have been fairly huge, feel dull and simplistic. I still hate the OB map and curse it's designers every time I play. I just hope the Skyrim map is not like the even more awful Fallout map. Aargh! :banghead:

@OP if you are talking about the game world you might want to say game world.

If not why would anyone want a tiny map crammed with stuff?

A tiny game world filled with stuff makes no sense. Open things up, spread out a little.

Oh, as to how I like my map ? Some color, some icons, and some roads connecting them.

I think some people are misunderstanding him. He means map as in game world, not map as in the inventory map.