Minimal Map Sizes

[Black Pagan]

What are your suggestions for Minimal Map Sizes for the Following aspects, Considering Practical mapping design, Efficiency and Monitor Resolution :

- A Vertically elongated Map (Player moves from Bottom to Top)
(Used in my Game for Outdoor Maps)

- A Horizontal elongated Map (Player moves from Right to Left Corner)
(Used in my Game for Dungeon Maps)

- A Square Map (Just a simple Map, Large enough to fit a single screen)
(Used in my Game for Indoor Maps)

Personally, I was thinking about going [17x23] for Vertical Maps, [23x13] for Horizontal Maps and [15x15] for Square Maps in my Game. Do you feel this is too small or inconvenient for a certain type of Monitor users ?

Would like to hear your opinions about this.

 

[TheoAllen]

No real minimum max size. The real minimum would be based on the game resolution (not monitor resolution). And that various depends on the context. The real question is why would you need the map to scroll in the first place?

Speaking of monitor resolution, the maximum game resolution you could have should be 1280x720 as people are still using 768p resolution these days. I don't belong to that group anymore, but you have to keep that in mind.

 

[Crusha]

I was re-examining maps and resolution in my own game. Something to consider -- I've seen players go to the default 1080x1920, and I think it makes a lot of games look completely ridiculous. Your maps often have to become bigger, to feel 'adequate', which I find to be incredibly alarming. Also, depending on resolution, certain games did it really well, to like the player just barely sees a chest on a specific path in a dungeon, and those moments are cool. None of the oldschool RPG's ran at 1080p lol. I'd suggest remember that. I can't tell you the perfect map-size and resolution, because it's kind of a process that you just look at and go 'yeah -- that looks great' or 'that looks terrible'.

 

[duty]

I've been playing around with a 15 wide by 11 tile tall maps with a screen resolution of 960x544. It has a nice retro Legend of Zelda feel to it and fits well on mobile. This also puts the default MV sprites at roughly the same scale as sprites used in the mobile versions of Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest 3.

Dropping to this screen size will require a resize on the face graphics (moderate reduction) and modification of how the party is positioned on the battle screen (the default UI will obscure the 3rd and 4th side view battler at this resolution).

 

[Black Pagan]

The real question is why would you need the map to scroll in the first place ?

Well, I'm just trying to find the Middle Ground here. I personally believe that scrolling makes the Player feel like they are making a bit more Progress.

Also, Its convenient for my Particular Game because i use it to create 2 Interesting Landscape Features in a single map. Example : A Desert with Fuel Station Base. The base is hidden on the top of the Map, Player has to start at the Desert at the bottom and explore as they move towards the top.

I just don't want to end up making a "Larger than required" Map, which is wasted time and effort which means I have to put more filler content than i originally planned.

 

[HumanNinjaToo]

As far as the size of the map goes, I think it would be dependent on the resolution of your game as well. I use a resolution of 1280x720 for my own, which translates my preferred basic map size of 40x23. So then to do your scrolling thing for vertical would be 40x46, and horizontal would be 80x23. I think, unless you're going for a large map, then double the scrolliing size (width or height) is enough to get a bigger feel then the screen-sized map.

I prefer working with maps that aren't too big. But then your map design comes into play as well. It's irritating (for me at least) to not be able to see on-screen if I'm heading toward a dead end because the map is just overly large. I don't think that you have to necessarily create large maps to give the game a feeling of being in a large space. There are plugins that allow you to have map transitions like zelda where they slide into one another without doing the fade-out/fade-in transfer thing, if that's an issue of not wanting to use multiple maps for one area/region.

The articles that I've read on good or appealing map design focus a lot on the player being able to identify what's within the map without having to do a whole lot of walking around to see all the details; probably why camera control is such a talked about feature in most games these days.

 

[TheoAllen]

I just don't want to end up making a "Larger than required" Map, which is wasted time and effort which means I have to put more filler content than i originally planned.

We really can not tell you. For example, I could just pop a random number, like, go with 30x15. But then again, you might feel that 25x15 feel better for whatever reason. You know your game, you know what's best for it.

 

[Ksi]

Once did a game 3x3 tiles. Fun times.

Remade it to 7x7 tiles and it was still fun times.


I will say, it's not the size of the map but what you do with it. It's just a hell of a lot easier for players to parse if they don't have to run for miles before they reach the edge of a map (and thus have to remember all the way through the map - maps themselves can act as 'signposts' for directions) but can work for wanting to get the player 'lost'. It's also a lot easier for the developer to fill a map or give it a focal point if it's smaller.

IMO smaller is better, but I've seen some really great big maps before too. What matters, again, is what you do with it and how you map.

 

[RayGarden7]

What are your suggestions for Minimal Map Sizes for the Following aspects, Considering Practical mapping design, Efficiency and Monitor Resolution :

- A Vertically elongated Map (Player moves from Bottom to Top)
(Used in my Game for Outdoor Maps)

- A Horizontal elongated Map (Player moves from Right to Left Corner)
(Used in my Game for Dungeon Maps)

- A Square Map (Just a simple Map, Large enough to fit a single screen)
(Used in my Game for Indoor Maps)

Personally, I was thinking about going [17x23] for Vertical Maps, [23x13] for Horizontal Maps and [15x15] for Square Maps in my Game. Do you feel this is too small or inconvenient for a certain type of Monitor users ?

Would like to hear your opinions about this.

I would prefer the option to switch between a small map and large one. The next think it would depend on the platform they are playing on and the resolution of the screen.

 

[Black Pagan]

I would prefer the option to switch between a small map and large one. The next think it would depend on the platform they are playing on and the resolution of the screen.

That sounds like an interesting idea. It will be a PC Game, I want to experiment with something different, Preferably smaller than the default resolution. If you have any ideas, do let me know.