With current tech, a massive map is possible. FUEL used a program that allowed for one of the largest if not the largest maps out there. I don't like the node system, though you could call what they are already doing with the dlc as one. If it's as they are using it now but they make the off shot maps bigger that would be great. I wouldn't mind coming out all grissled after long trips.

Kinda like this: http://gabriel77cortez.deviantart.com/art/Examplar-272111075?q=gallery%3Agabriel77cortez%2F4398145&qo=44

Yep like that.

I don't get why people are against the idea of a game with many large cities covering states. Imagine if we could have gone to DC, Pittsburgh and Point Lookout Maryland as well as other large cities within 500 miles or more of DC all in the same game without DLC.

Hell, if they made the next game have 3 areas, each 50% the size of Fallout 3 (150% in total) it would be an improvement.
Not exactly like the originals but a step in the right direction while still having exploration.
Win win.
Then in the next game they could make it 5 areas, each 40% the size of Fallout 3. (with each marked location spread out farther from each other though)

No, they all need to be the size of F3 or larger.

How big was the Skyrim map compared to Fallout 3's or New Vegas'?

About the same size.


Why? Think they'll just churn out a game 3 times or more bigger than their last games no problem? What are they going to fill the maps with without making it repetitive and boring? There is a point when things become too much.

Then I think node maps with smaller area could be an improvement. But instead of a grid with locations on it, I would rather have it just be their own seperate maps with a way to transport between them, the same way as DLC's work I guess. And if you wanted to fast travel to another node area, it would just take a bit longer to load. And like I said earlier, Hawaii would be the best option to accomplish this.

Why? Because I like to wander the wastelands, not play a game that as soon as I leave a town I have to go through a pointless grid to the next town.

There's nothing to stop you from wandering around with smaller and more focused nodes, if they are designed to offer that (which is what I believe is being asked for). I'd say having overly large areas devoid of meaningful substance is more pointless than a feature with a clear gameplayfunction and purpose.

Invisible walls will stop me, I don't want small nodes that only encompass a small area that doesn't have the room to have anything worth seeing in it. F1 and F2 system had the same thing over and over and over again till you got to main area, so your saying that had substance?

I don't think anyone's is asking for areas that have nothing "extra" worth seeing. I also have no idea what you refer to as "main area" in Fallout 1 and 2. The nodes there did what they were designed to do, quests and NPC interaction. There weren't extra empty spaces in them, because that was not the goal of them.

I responded to your point because it seems odd to me that if there was to be nodes, the game, according to you, would need to be multiple times bigger than without them.

So what, you want everything to be a bland grey [censored]? I mean a town or a quest location, how is that hard to understand? Where did you get empty spaces from?

No I don't want that (though that's what the games now are). The empty spaces was a reference to having explorable terrain attached to the node.

STOP SPEAKING TRUTH DAMN IT!!!! Although I do think Bethesda did a VERY good job with the Skyrim map, just not so with some of the quest's. There was plenty of empty space in the originals though. Also if the map were to go back to that node system, are you saying that every single one is going to be detailed so show upcaoming landscape? If they did that there would be no point to it, the current Fallout node system where there is a large central map with dlc location scattered around it works better.

The game Fuel supposedly had the biggest map out of pretty much all games. (Going off reviews) Would that map style be viable for Fallout? It seems it would to me. From the youtube vids, it looked like all it needed was raiders and mutants and it could be Fallout. Just my opinion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhyyUiYQolA&feature=related the link to the youtube vid

well it depends on the main storey, how big the map is and if you have some cinda transportation


the problem whit fallout 3 and skyrim map′s is that everything is so tight together. the raider camp is 2m from friendly area′s.

its the wasteland... give us some space (give us wasteland in wasteland) betwen the mobs, events, npcs and so on

Ha, ya dun found what I have been looking for for a year now.

@King of the Wastes. You're welcome.

Fuel is a racing game. So that could also cure the "Fallout needs vehicles" want as well.

We're not going to see a node map again.

As hard as it is for some to accept, FO and FO2 aren't coming back. When Fallout was taken over by gamesas the fate of classic Fallout was put in jeopardy and when Fallout 3 blew up, its fate was sealed.

Fallout is now what Fallout 3 and F:NV were. Fallout 3 sold how many more copies than FO and FO2 combined? Two times? Three times? Old school fallout fans might look at the abandonment of the old style and feel like they've been given the middle finger, but this is a business. The old guard is more of a niche than anything at this point, and Bethesda isn't going to cater to them at the expense of the bottom line, and while you can be sad about that, you can't fault Bethesda for doing what has worked for them. Shaking your fist at Bethesda for making FO like TES and daydreaming of a return to the old style is the definition of futility.

Realistically, the options an old school Fallout fan has are to let it go and embrace the new direction or move on from the franchise with only their memory of bygone days (and their old copies of Fallout).

I haven't seen anyone bring this up yet but there is already a form of "node" system in FO3 and FO:NV. Everytime you enter a building or Freeside, you're taken out of one map and put in another. So would it be plausible to have multiple maps the size of DC or NV hooked together. So when you hit the invisible wall you get a loading screen and another map loads and you continue on your way. Just like going though a door. Example: You're following the interstate to Pittsburg, that's close to a 10hr drive from DC, you would have a few maps to walk through to get there. So in essence, bigger map.



Edit: I was off. Closer to 5hr drive.

I've seen a mod use a 3d node map system almost like the old games using a highwayman model rather than a red cross going across the map in http://www.ravenmodding.terminal47.net/?p=875. If they can do it I don't see why Bethatsda can't do something similar. Although I wonder how they are going to do random encounters. Their GTS mod dropped you in a small map for each one based on chance for its random enconters when you fast traveled somewhere.


Ths isnt a good comparison considering there wasnt as much of a market back then than there is now. I don't believe any game sold that well back then. Arena and Daggerfall didn't sell that much either. Gaming was just a niche market.

In my map example. Random encounter would be like they are now. You're in the new map walking along and a raider attacks. Kill them and move on then a Yau gui. Kill it. Eventually hit the invisible wall, load screen, new map and continue on your way.