OR... Yeah. They could have smaller areas with gateways to the next.
Lets play pros and cons!
Pros:
THIS adds immersion and clearly says to players, "You are going a considerable distance."
Cons:
it would be boring.
Of course, they could cut the map to pieces only that would do more harm to the game than the current state.
Individual areas would be quite small
not to mention the need for continuous loading.
This would be a pretty big problem with multiplayer.
Now wich desing win this contest hm?
You will find out AFTER the commercials!
Nah, just kidding ... the one Larian used, obviously ... only mad man would sacrifice everything else just to get some level of immersion.
---
It feels like BG3 maps use the same basic concept of parallel scales for distances between “activity hubs†and “connective tissueâ€.
Wanna hear something crazy?
Larian also uses two time-scales running in parallel ...
Sadly that causes some bugs to occur quite often. :-/
Like if your turn takes too long, time-limited (aka turn-limited in turn based mode) effects (like AoE damage, buffs like bless or rage, ...) dissapear prematurely.
---
The issue with the BG3 map is that either things are differently scaled
And the former means that the map is inconsistent, which is additionally problematic because the map is inconsistent to an *unknown* degree, meaning the player has to assert their own headcannon for which areas aren't to scale, and to what degree.
I couldnt say it better, thank you!
