Why is it that the western, northern, and northwestern portions of the map blocked? Is the area being saved for some DLC, if it is it would be ridiculous to pay for the entire map in the vanilla version. If it isn't, then why is it there in the first place? When will we be able to explore the entire map, if ever?

No, no more of the map is going to be 'unlocked' in any DLC. The map in this game uses natural terrain as a world barricade as opposed to Invisible walls like Fallout 3 did. It's merely a cosmetic thing. Outside the areas on the map are just empty land plots and low res textures, nothing to exciting.

The Northern Passage?

It could possibly be earmarked as an access point for a future DLC map.

It won't. It's been confirmed by the devs. I seen it. See previous comments.

Look on the bright side, PC moders now have space to put whatever they want into the game.

Which adds to replayablilty

well we console users are [censored]

Such is the joy of PC gaming.

...not to flame or anything, I'm not. I am jealous of all PS3 owners.

the map as it is is pretty lifeless so just adding more areas is kinda pointless, until obsidian learns to make dynamic open world maps, just making the area bigger isn't gonna do much, it might add another shack or two, a few more cazerdores, they would prob just stick 3 more powderganger in the area, even if they made the map 10 times bigger, it would still be just as dull crusing around, i got tired of looking at the same two bark scorpions at hidden valley and the same 3 powder gangers near jeans skydiving and the same gecko runing across the road near primm, oy vey ROFL. geez.

I like it as is. I guess I just don't put the same value on quantity it as others do... I remember playing the last level of "Eye of the Beholder" and realizing that the map was ? empty :shrug: because the layout of the area did not need the rest of the available space (the rest was there, just inaccessable). I certainly didn't feel cheated or believe that Westwood did a poor job for not filling the map.

Perhaps I don't fully understand what a "dynamic open world map" means; From TES & Fallout 3, I got the impression it meant an overpopulated land mass with chance wonders, and cool places to explore over every other hill; un-looted and they even repopulate in a few days after you run through them leaving a bloody mess of dead bodies.

I prefer a plausible landscape with the few creatures that manage to stay alive out there. Since I don't play the games to chase down (with a bullet) everything that walks, nor expect a hidden trove in every hovel... I don't look it as a disappointment. :shrug: It reminds me of the earlier games, (which I happen to believe were better indicators of what the series was supposed to be like.)

Yea, that sounds like a lot of fun. Lots of stuff to do, stuff to kill, bunch of junk to loot, repeatable and a line of dead bodies proving you're awesome. I want that.

Dynamic - marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change

Sounds awesome doesn't it?

Depends on the mood... I'd play that in a game like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYtPSgT-3rM or Witchaven², (or even Diablo)... but not in a serious RPG. :shrug:

Not particularly, no. IMO there is something preferable with the linear game that takes you through a series of specific locations where exciting events take place, as opposed to an open world where exciting events happen where ever you happen to go. The latter, I just can't take seriously.

For me it just ruins the suspension of disbelief.... That and the trade off. The trade off is that the active dynamic world resets every three game days; So is it really productive activity or change?

yeah you can make a game like the sims i guess and some people like that, but for me, i don't like plausible, realistic or believable etc, thats much too limiting, i prefer when game developer uses artistic licencse to make make a dynamic and fun game world as opposed to something thats quasi realistic like new vegas.

It's just unfortunate that the areas they used as barriers are still represented on the map; I suppose they needed to keep them to keep the nice square shape, but it would've been nice if impassable terrain was left off of the "game world" map.

I can respect that; I can even enjoy that... just not usually in a game that I want to take seriously. Deep RPG's are few and far between; and RPG == limitations (that's the idea).

The biggest mistake Obsidian made is having the map on a square screen so folks think stuff is missing.

As for the Dynamic Maps, Daggerfall had those. I don't remember if the cities were dynamic, I do remember them being real big and taking a long time to get around them, but the wilderness and dungeons were all dynamically generated. However you did not spend time traveling across the wilderness in that game. Kind of like Fallout 1/2 where you could walk if you wanted to, but you really fast traveled from one location to the next.

Yah and like what about the mojave outpost where it says you need a key to get on the other side i think thats bull crap. they should allow you over there.

There's nothing beyond there. Same thing was used in Fallout 3 at Mama Dolce's loading yard, if you unlocked the gate with a console command, there was just empty space there.

There is nothing beyond there

indeed, but if you must http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5138/5452580022_1b6973bdba.jpg there's whats behind it. some nice flat, empty desert....

They didn't have much choice I assume (besides making a smaller square area)

But well, to the east is Legion territory and the Colorado serving as natural border. What's to the west? Death Valley and the nuclear test sites, and beyond that Broken Hills and New Reno.