Map seems to have a lot of misused/misplaced territory for a Western game

[Cheyenne Dog Soldier]

The map's fictional layout has always bothered me and the RDR2 map, even combined with the old one seems like a lot of space is used for what is replicating East of the Mississippi. The Great Plains in the US covers an area the entire north to south length of the country and 10 states, from Texas to North Dakota and in RDR it is a tiny section with telegraph lines visible at every point. There are areas of the Great Plains in 2018 where you can drive for hours and see no powerlines or human habitation.

It was the worst example from the first map of immersion or replication.

In what will likely be the 2nd map, we have an area from Roanoke Ridge down through the whole New Bordeaux area that takes up the entire length of the map north to south (what the Great Plains should do), but represents an area (the traditional South up to DC) that past 1865 plays no part in the imagery or immersion of the American West. If this game started during the Civil War then it would be a good map, but it's likely starting in the 1890's and these areas were nothing but strongholds of the defeated and still resentful democrats and their terror gang the KKK. It has nothing to do with a Western game. And now we have the Scarlett Meadows too? What is this Alabama and Mississippi? Again, way too late of a time period for this map.

Cumberland Forest is essentially Tennessee, Ohio valley, Kentucky, again cool area, but a not for a game in the 1890's to the 1900's. Prohibition hasn't even hit yet so no moonshining. Somewhere in here is Missouri and the James Gang territory, but again, that was the 1870's.

The Heartlands is Texas Oklahoma and maybe Eastern Kansas Nebraska, but that should be part of the massive Great Plains, with roving buffalo and Southern Cheyenne, Comanche and Kiowa.

The Grizzlies are a great name but this represents a remote and hard to get to mountain range and placing it right across the river from the most settled area of the map is bizarre and takes away from its immersion. I felt the same way about Tall Trees. The beauty and romance of geography and distance is completely lost on Rockstar.

Big Valley is a great name and at least it's next to the Grizzlies, but in size, for a Western game, it should be bigger than the Eastern areas.

The whole map feels like an afterthought.

I hope that this map is not real and that everything has been redone to be more realistic and immersive.


 

 

[Benjo]

There needs to be a lot of artistic license when putting this kind of thing in a game. It is a balance between fun and realism, between accuracy and ease of travel. 

[YellowDragon]

Just like in GTA games, they are basing their locations off of real ones which means they will be recognizable but still different enough to enjoy the game without being 100% historically accurate. 

[ZLion]

20 hours ago, YellowDragon said:

Just like in GTA games, they are basing their locations off of real ones which means they will be recognizable but still different enough to enjoy the game without being 100% historically accurate. 

Yeah this. We aren't going to get a game that plays on the real map entirely, it would be too hard and there would likely be things they would have to change for copyright reasons too. It is easier to make up areas and base them on real ones.

[Cheyenne Dog Soldier]

I didn't say it needed to be 100% historical, I said that at the very least the Great Plains need to be great, not the size of a suburban backyard. I bet if they asked for a user submitted map contest, just of the areas and town locations, 75% of them would be better than the current layout.

[elmZ]

19 hours ago, Cheyenne Dog Soldier said:

I didn't say it needed to be 100% historical, I said that at the very least the Great Plains need to be great, not the size of a suburban backyard. I bet if they asked for a user submitted map contest, just of the areas and town locations, 75% of them would be better than the current layout.

How small do you think the game will be? Or rather how large would you expect it to be? It has to be able to run on consoles. It can't be HUGE like an MMO. 

[Glopez]

Yeah the game is going to be large but it isn't going to be massive. It doesn't need to be. I never understood why people liked having huge maps. 

[Benjo]

13 hours ago, Glopez said:

Yeah the game is going to be large but it isn't going to be massive. It doesn't need to be. I never understood why people liked having huge maps. 

Bigger the better for me. To explain, I spend a lot of time just roaming about. 12 months down the line if it is a small map then I get bored very quickly, I like to have expansive maps so I can go somewhere I haven't been for a couple of months etc

Edited February 24, 2018 by Benjo