The use of a world map

[zildjosh97]

A common thing between RPGs is the use of a world map. Not the item where you can view the map, but like when you exit this map you get to the world map as a tiny sprite then proceed to the next icon to get to the next map. Like, Chrono Trigger. Which is more popular these days? Games with such things, or just open-world maps like those in Pokemon games?

 

[Eschaton]

The former is a consequence of limits tontechnology, while the latter is a result of meticulous attention to detail.

A world map would give your game an old-school RPG feel, no doubt. It'll be easier for you to make. A complete, open world might feel smaller, but it will feel complete instead of disjointed.

 

[zildjosh97]

May I ask which one you prefer personally?

EDIT: Damn, your sig is very helpful.

 

[Eschaton]

A single player's preferences shouldn't matter. Instead, consider what kind of game your are making and how much work you want to put into it.

Again, you'll probably have an easier time making an overworld, rather than a meticulously detailed world made of little maps.

Do you want an immersive world? Do you want an old-school RPG?

In the end, don't try to cater to people; make the game you want to make.

 

[kerbonklin]

Open-world maps that you travel through to reach one location to another (as eschaton said) is definitely for those with attention to detail and kind of "bringing the adventure immersion to focus". The player gets the feeling of real travel, making their way from the town at the bottom of a mountain to the very top every step of the way, instead of just warping there in 10 seconds. These types of maps can of course be challenging to make because you have to avoid repetition while keeping the player interested in the scenery as they walk/run through for various maps before reaching a new location. Usually this mapping goes well with games that allow special player abilities to either allow getting through the map, blocking players from taking certain paths, or just as puzzle obstacles. (in terms of Pokemon, cut, strength, rock smash, surf, etc.)

Over-world maps (most old JRPGs) are for games that want to specifically focus more on the locations themselves rather than how the player gets there. These games also tend to focus more resources on other game-aspects since they're not spending much time on maps, like battles, location designs, story line, cut-scenes, etc.  However this is only limited to time and budget, and if you have plenty of those as a casual RPGMaker user then you don't really have to gimp yourself as you have all the time in the world.

Both are very valid styles even to this day, but if I had to prefer one for myself, it would be open-world maps. My favorite title of this type was Sword of Mana for the GBA.  Also a good RPGMaker game that uses this style is Lunar Wish: Orbs of Fate if you want to check it out for ideas.

 

[zildjosh97]

A single player's preferences shouldn't matter. Instead, consider what kind of game your are making and how much work you want to put into it.

Again, you'll probably have an easier time making an overworld, rather than a meticulously detailed world made of little maps.

Do you want an immersive world? Do you want an old-school RPG?

In the end, don't try to cater to people; make the game you want to make.

You seem passionate about making games. Thanks for your advice

Open-world maps that you travel through to reach one location to another (as eschaton said) is definitely for those with attention to detail and kind of "bringing the adventure immersion to focus". The player gets the feeling of real travel, making their way from the town at the bottom of a mountain to the very top every step of the way, instead of just warping there in 10 seconds. These types of maps can of course be challenging to make because you have to avoid repetition while keeping the player interested in the scenery as they walk/run through for various maps before reaching a new location. Usually this mapping goes well with games that allow special player abilities to either allow getting through the map, blocking players from taking certain paths, or just as puzzle obstacles. (in terms of Pokemon, cut, strength, rock smash, surf, etc.)

Over-world maps (most old JRPGs) are for games that want to specifically focus more on the locations themselves rather than how the player gets there. These games also tend to focus more resources on other game-aspects since they're not spending much time on maps, like battles, location designs, story line, cut-scenes, etc.  However this is only limited to time and budget, and if you have plenty of those as a casual RPGMaker user then you don't really have to gimp yourself as you have all the time in the world.

Both are very valid styles even to this day, but if I had to prefer one for myself, it would be open-world maps. My favorite title of this type was Sword of Mana for the GBA.  Also a good RPGMaker game that uses this style is Lunar Wish: Orbs of Fate if you want to check it out for ideas.

Wow that's helpful. Thanks for pinpointing things out. I'm going to try out games of different kinds made with RM to get some ideas. I'll be leaning into open-world maps since I'm doing this as a hobby and I'm not really chasing a deadline. Thanks!

 

[Wavelength]

In general I prefer world maps in RPGs (but continuous worlds in other genres like MMOs).  Part of the question is what's more important to the player's enjoyment - the "game" or the "experience"?  Where the game elements are more important I'd lean toward world maps, since they don't get in the way of a player's objectives; where the experience elements are more important I'd lean toward continuous worlds, since they give a much better sense of scale and feel.

 

[Diretooth]

While I prefer to have a world map, I would also prefer to have a world map that looks similar to the exterior tiles in the RTP. I don't like the tiny things that look like buildings or various other objects, I like to design large worlds that, even if the player is railroaded, they can explore to their heart's content.

 

[Xenoraze]

One of the benefits of the "overworld" map is the ease of travel and reduced travel time. Immersive and expansive game worlds such as Elder Scrolls (from Oblivion on) and many MMOs solve this through mechanics like fast travel and various instant transport methods to and from designated hubs (ferries, airships, teleporters, etc). That would be something to consider when designing a large game world with no "overworld" map.

 

[Eschaton]

Ask yourself a question:  "What is more important about the game experience, the journey or the destination?"  Using a world map emphasises the destination because most of the world is truncated in favor of the "major locations."  Mapping out your world completely emphasises the journey.

 

[whitesphere]

Personally, I favor a world map because I like focusing more on the destinations.  The big downfall of a truly open world map, where the entire world is mapped in detail, is it's incredibly easy to get lost if it's not done properly.  In games like Skyrim, that's precisely the point --- to show a sprawling world where things happen.

I've seen world maps in games from the NES era (Dragon Warror/Zelda: Link to the Past) up to Chrono Trigger/FFIV (I haven't played any newer games so I can't say how those work), and like being able to clearly see where I'm supposed to go, rather than forging down blind alleys.