Are the devs going to increase the size of the build able map in A2?? I haven't heard anything regarding this, but maybe it slipped my eyes. I would like to be able to expand a bit more than it currently allows on the sides of the map.
Park size?
- Thread starter RedBlueLaw
- Start date
Vampiro
Volunteer Moderator
I asked this question as well but it wasn't answered unfortunatly.
Thats something Im curious about too. Dont really think there's been discussion of scenario/campaign levels in the game yet, but I really hope they do include them in the Full release. That being said, if they do, Id like to see a scenario editor that would allow for the changing in map sizes.
They are still working on optimizing the games performance. I wouldnt expect this feature in the alpha. It is fairly large as of right now anyway. I'm sure they will allow for larger maps but I would be surprised if it gets too much larger, at least without a dip in performance.
A bigger map would be great but Frontier got a bit burned with this on RCT3. Outside of campaign mode they gave us a huge map to play on and nearly everyone complained when their current PC's couldn't keep anything like a decent frame rate on them. Frontier gave us this wonderful playground to build in and as is human nature, people started building huge parks with no self restraint ( who really has in games like these!?) and wondered why even the super rigs at the time couldn't cope....fast forward to present time and I don't think Frontier would want the same thing happening again?
And Frontier for the most part got criticised for this.' Why enable such a big map if it is impossible to fill it?' was one of the more popular questions...
I know you could say that the choice could be left up to them but inevitably, given the freedom of a much larger map, most of us can't restrain ourselves and build on smaller maps our PC's can handle, which leads to disappointment. At least that is what history shows us....?
Maybe once all the features are in place and Frontier have had a chance to do some serious optimization they may increase the park size or at least give a choice of buying more land. They did state in one of the pre-alpha videos that the Kraken Park was contained in around 25-30% of the total buildable space and sure enough we can build outwards on that map. This makes me wonder if that is the standard planned map size for the game?
Last edited:
Yes the maps do need to be bigger .. Not much bigger though.
Remember with the terrain tools you can build quite a bit of verticality into a map as well, which wasn't really the case with RCT3. That automatically makse the maps bigger straight away.
I certainly don't think we are in a SimCity situation where everyone will be complaining about the space we get. Theme parks can be big of course, but in the end they size has to be manageable from a performance point of view as well.
Remember with the terrain tools you can build quite a bit of verticality into a map as well, which wasn't really the case with RCT3. That automatically makse the maps bigger straight away.
I certainly don't think we are in a SimCity situation where everyone will be complaining about the space we get. Theme parks can be big of course, but in the end they size has to be manageable from a performance point of view as well.
Very true. I'm not demanding that the map double in size, stat. I'm thinking even something like a 10% increase from what we have now.
The current sandbox map in Alpha 1 is starting to be not enough big for my park. But it's also true that yesterday I had my first game crash when I was making a building, so I guess the game needs to be more balanced in resources before we get bigger maps...
Interestingly, Disney makes their parks feel bigger than they actually are by using tricks with their path system. You walk a long way to go a relatively short distance. With use of scenery and such you hardly notice the illusion. The characters use the underground tunnels that are straight and more direct, so the same Mickey can appear at different parts of the park more quickly, saving money by not paying as many Micky's.
Do you have any pictures to illustrate this? I think it would be a good example and would help.
I hear you and I would love a bigger map size too but 10% would do nothing, it would be barely noticeable. A ten percent overall increase would perhapse add the width of the widest path all the way around the map, you wouldn't notice. Even a ten percent increase in just one direction, for example along just one side of the map. Well to visualise, divide the map into ten strips and ad just one of those strips to one side of the map. Would that really make much difference? To really expland a park, which is why most people would want more space, I think you would need to at least add 50% and that is adding a LOT of extra work on the CPU and GPU....
I am no coder and the game is going to be optomized more but I wouldn't be surprised if the map sizes stay the same. Come to think of it Frontier have never even hinted at larger map sizes. They have talked about adding to everything else up to release, but never on increasing the map size. May mean something or nothing - I am really just guessing.
Like I say I am with you ..... Given a delicious slice of cake who would choose the smaller slice ? [haha]
I know this isn't 2004, but based on the way RCT3 handled larger map sizes (and we know that was made by Frontier) it was possible to buy more land, so maybe this is what is planned for later (of course this is just conjecture on my part).
They need to have a backdoor mod like Cities Skylines. That way people with a higher performance PC can choose to be able to build bigger parks. But it would be something you would have to activate. My only concern with Planet Coaster right now is park size, and they have been very quite about it. I think 2.5x to 3x the current size would be great and not to unrealistic.
Yeah I feel they will do that testing for map sizes during the beta stages just before the time the final release is for the game. When ever features are set first then they can finalize the size of maps and optimize it so it can run on the set of computers that people currently own.
Zooming out to full aerial view of the current sandbox, could the absence of trees and a distinct straight line on the outskirts of the current boundary hint as to the potential total map size?
The white box is the current park border. The yellow is a subtle second boundary sans trees. I think I could live with this if it were the maximum.
The white box is the current park border. The yellow is a subtle second boundary sans trees. I think I could live with this if it were the maximum.
Vampiro
Volunteer Moderator
If thats the case the map will be about 2,5 times of what we have right now. I thinks thats pretty much big enough. Bigger is better ofcourse but i think the yellow lines will give me enough room to build a pretty awesome park...
I'm worried that even with the current size, guests struggle to make their way to the back parts of the park. This was a problem with RCT3 and they added in Stamp Stations to get peeps to travel further back to where you want them to go so they can collect stamps. Kind of an odd solution but it worked ok.
I'm now having the same problem with this park,
There are about 4 other rides in the back near the red coaster(mix of family/thrill) and only maybe a dozen peeps make their way back there at a given time and 99% of them are just wondering, not directly going to any ride.
Most guests hang around the front of the park riding the same rides over and over again, back and forth. They always have a route to go to when they're up front but in the back it's just always "wondering" even though there are a lot of rides around them. ODD!
This will probably improve when they add in park maps and transportation(YAY actual working transport! *heavybreathing) but I'm hoping it won't be a problem like it was in previous RCT games with ghost towns in the back parts and right now that's what's happening again. I want to see guests (at least with a map) want to go to any ride anywhere in the park rather than what's near them.
I'm now having the same problem with this park,
There are about 4 other rides in the back near the red coaster(mix of family/thrill) and only maybe a dozen peeps make their way back there at a given time and 99% of them are just wondering, not directly going to any ride.
Most guests hang around the front of the park riding the same rides over and over again, back and forth. They always have a route to go to when they're up front but in the back it's just always "wondering" even though there are a lot of rides around them. ODD!
This will probably improve when they add in park maps and transportation(YAY actual working transport! *heavybreathing) but I'm hoping it won't be a problem like it was in previous RCT games with ghost towns in the back parts and right now that's what's happening again. I want to see guests (at least with a map) want to go to any ride anywhere in the park rather than what's near them.
Last edited: