Some small talk about II's map

The thing is that current 3.0 maps feel, small, even maps like Russia that are praised for their size.

Now, I’m not expecting something to compete with DayZ or Zomboid, but I expect something that’s not small.

My second point is cities themselves, I’d rather have a large low density city compared to smaller ones with skyscrapers, but that’s just me.

So, what do you think?


I agree with this. 3.0 really bugged me how all of the big cities seemed like toy towns with massive 6 story apartments and barely anything else. Would also love to see actual suburbs surrounding cities like that so they don’t feel like a kids lego set, if nelson chooses to attempt to make large cities. I would also be a fan of large spaces between locations with small but still notable areas like huts or camping grounds scattered between them, and more things that arent on maps.

From what I’ve read areas between cities are rarely, if at all, empty. In World War Z (the book, not the godforsaken movie), it was described that clearing urban areas was exceptionally difficult due to how difficult establishing a perimeter was as the most sought after prewar real estate was the area in between two existing cities, a concept referred to as “in-fill.” Based on this, it would be interesting to see a map almost completely made up of suburbs with large metropolitan areas and certain isolated areas such as parks and nature preserves.

This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.