Why are video games always so scaled down? - Games

[QUOTE=Ninjarooster;22791359]Hasn't it been in development for a couple years now?[/QUOTE] 8 years in development, still another 4 coming.

HALT HALT HALT HALT. Hitler. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Extended, Another Dumb Bump" - RayvenQ))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Turkey Sandvich;22765000]Naa, Just Cause 2 does it better[/QUOTE] Just Cause 2 map feels the tiniest out of any game I've played.

GTA IV and Read Dead Redemption both do a great job with scale.

Tom Clancy's Tom Clancy's HAWX by Tom Clancy basically throws a middle finger to scale. It's beautiful when you're up in the air, but fly close to the ground and you'll realize your jet is as tall as a skyscraper.

Wow, nice bump. I still do agree tho.

I got really mad in Fallout 3 where buildings on the inside are huge enough where you can get lost, yet on the outside they are as long and wide as around 5 super mutants lying down in a line along the side of the building.

Fallout 3 did a pretty good job, IMO.

I hate this in Just cause 2, the map is apparently super massive but it doesn't feel very big at all.

Honestly, even places like in Dragon Age felt too damn big at times, and it was all detail too, except for the one rare house you could go in and unlock a dusty old chest in the corner. I was in the starting Dwarf city for literally an hour, just wandering around. In most cases, like everyone's been saying- it's too much for our computers to handle, unless you optimize, which results in a duller enviroment that's just got size going for it. Would you rather play in a city where every building is accessible, but isn't really that big, almost like a town in Fable, or would you rather play in a city where maybe one in 100 buildings are accessible, like in any Grand Theft Auto game, but on an even larger scale.

[QUOTE=Barnhouse;24517250]I hate this in Just cause 2, the map is apparently super massive but it doesn't feel very big at all.[/QUOTE] That's because you're always within reach of vehicles that can travel at the speed of light. Try running across it, I fucking dare you.

In Flatout 2, I remember crashing, flying out of the windshield and landing next to a shopping cart. Then I noticed, if you put the driver next to the shopping cart, he is so short he wouldn't even reach the top of the cart without stretching his arms. And the driver and car is in general way smaller than it should be. Seriously, he would have to climb his way up to a chair. :colbert:

[QUOTE=kwkws;22790401]Imagine space travel in full scale..[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.infinity-universe.com/Infinity/index.php[/url]

[QUOTE=Generic_Monk;24517304]That's because you're always within reach of vehicles that can travel at the speed of light. Try running across it, I fucking dare you.[/QUOTE] true enough I suppose, but I still think just cause 2 is guilty of downscaling to at least some extent, especially in the cities.

[QUOTE=Nyaos;22776049]Play Oblivion and turn off autorun. That's a good example of scale, but you'll spend literally an hour walking from Imperial to somewhere like Bruma [editline]11:18AM[/editline] In Grand Theft Auto IV they did a really ingenius thing, when you look up it distorts the camera giving you that sense of vertigo. When you look up at skyscrapers above you it really feels like they're massive and looming over you[/QUOTE] Took my about 100 hours to find fast travel. I would set up a time at night when I'd dedicate to travel in the game. [editline]01:22PM[/editline] [QUOTE=joost1120;24516938]Fallout 3 did a pretty good job, IMO.[/QUOTE] On average yea, but rivet city feels weird to me.

I think you are ALL missing the point here. It's not about the amount of objects, it's the size and position of them. We could make them larger and more realistic, but "larger and more realistic" often means "enormous and distracting".

I liked Serious Sam's scale. It felt big but wasn't boring at the same time. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJOVj3uc5_I[/media]

There's a trope for this: [url]http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UnitsNotToScale[/url] What's that? You had better things to do? OH WELL NEVER MIND ENJOY YOUR 200+ TABS And to all those who think that with Doom graphics we could have an entire planet, I suggest they look at Dwarf Fortress. That barely simulates a tiny portion of the world at a time, but it is still incredibly processor intensive.

[QUOTE=sami-pso;22778602]Did you even read the OP? I don't claim to know how games are programmed. And i fail to believe you do.[/QUOTE] He's right, scale of objects has absolutely nothing to do with how expensive they are to render. It's putting detail where the scale is that does. You could render hundreds of crappy HUGE skyscrapers and it's no harder on the system then rendering hundreds of crappy tiny skyscrapers.

Interesting point to raise OP. I guess it is just the problem of execution and as has previously been mentioned - it wouldn't be as fun if it took a fuckton of time to travel from one place to another...

[QUOTE=TBot_Alpha;24520661]There's a trope for this: [url]http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/UnitsNotToScale[/url] What's that? You had better things to do? OH WELL NEVER MIND ENJOY YOUR 200+ TABS [/QUOTE] you fucking bastard

I actually enjoyed driving in Far Cry 2, minus the everyone wants to kill me bit. It was fun to fly planes and drive cars and jack trains to traverse GTA:SA's terrain, large worlds are fun, god.

Red Orchestra is basically 1:1 scale in size of terrain, structures, and objects. And I find it boring half the time because it takes a while to find the action.

[QUOTE=ZestyLemons;24522235]I actually enjoyed driving in Far Cry 2[/QUOTE] FUCK that game Sorry, involuntary reaction. My bad.

that game coming out in 2011 Spec Ops: The Line seems to get scale just right [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsaK8qYPvS0[/media]

I hate the GTA style interior of a building being twice as large as it's exterior. [editline]02:38PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Generic_Monk;24517304]That's because you're always within reach of vehicles that can travel at the speed of light. Try running across it, I fucking dare you.[/QUOTE] I didn't like how "cities" with the exception of Panau City were about 10 buildings, and every city used the same building models arranged differently.

Funny how everyone is talking about GTA IV and ArmA II because as I type, my brother is sitting next to me playing GTA IV on the 360 while I'm installing ArmA II: Operation Arrowhead. :D

WoW did an OK job of this.

Red Dead Redemption has it almost perfect, not so long that is is excruciatingly boring and not so short it seems unrealistic.

[QUOTE=MutantBadger;22765498]APB is pretty close to that, have fun with 20 Gigs of hardrive space being consumed.[/QUOTE] UH WHAT ? You must be fucking high. APB has 2 rather small maps. They are NO WHERE near New York City scale. I love APB and the map sizes, but at most they're 1.5km across.