[BGEE/BG1] Towns fully explored

Boaster

Like BG2, could we just have cities and towns fully explored?

Kithrixx

It'd certainly be nice.

1130210

Yeah, I agree. Dang it was annoying not having icons and the towns explored. The fog of war really bogged down the experience because it's hard to maneuver between the houses, and get all that icky fog outta the way.

DivineBlood

Perhaps Adding a feature: A purchable Map in every city: This can remove the fog of war. If not purchased, the Fog stays

elminster

I disagree. Having to explore towns and figure out where inns are located (and other places) is part of the experience. Plus, if you want them explored fully cast clairvoyance.

Though DivineBloods idea is good.

RomulanPaladin

Well, there's another option. As long as AI scripting commands don't radically change, there's an "Explore()" function. That means that we can make an AI script that explores an area once we hit a defined hotkey or even automatically when entering a "city" area.

ryu1

I also agree with elminster. Exploration is what makes BG the game it is today, I was quite annoyed when the city maps were fully revealed in BG2. It didn't give me the opportunity to find inns, shops, important NPCs as it already showed you where everything is (pretty much). So I would prefer it to explore the cities myself. For those who want it to be fully explored should be given an option in the Gameplay settings (just like Rest until Healed etc) or include maps as suggested by DivineBlood.

_Q_

I definitely would like towns explored and markers added to the maps like BG2. This is just one of those parts of the game where the convenience factor is more important to me than the immersion factor.

Dee

To me, having the maps fully explored helps to demonstrate the size and breadth of a town or city. For Baldur's Gate, it makes little sense that you'd be standing at the gate and not be able to see what's at the end of the street in front of you.

That said, I do think that we still need some "soft" fog of war. No spotting NPCs from across the map, for instance; you should be able to see structures, but not people.

I also submit that the map markers shouldn't appear for a specific location until you have traveled to that location and/or received directions to that location from an NPC.

Senash

DivineBlood said:

Perhaps Adding a feature: A purchable Map in every city: This can remove the fog of war. If not purchased, the Fog stays

I really love this idea! Makes perfect sense and I don't think it requires too much work. Maos could be purchased at taverns, you buy them and you know where to go, where are buildings/walls blocking your way and where to find shops or certain areas of interest.

darrenkuo

DivineBlood said:

Perhaps Adding a feature: A purchable Map in every city: This can remove the fog of war. If not purchased, the Fog stays

Agree ! Otherwise, we had lots of gold can't be consumed in a later part of game.

Son_of_Imoen

I disagree. I find the fog of war convenient. It helps as a reminder which parts of the city you did and didn't visit. Baldur's Gate is a huge city, with a lot of quests to be found and a lot that can be done. By looking at the map and seeing where you have and haven't been greatly helps, even more than the journal, in seeing what you have done in the city and what not. Especially helpful when picking up a campaign again in chapter 5, while you have other campaigns going on that also are taking place in chapter 5. Just like a look at the world map tells you what you didn't and didn't visit in the particular campaign you're loading.

Fog of war is the diary of the serial gamer!

SirK8

I found the fact that the city was already explored in BGII extremely frustrating. I like the purchasable map idea, or even a button that "shows map" - at least some option to have it explored or not, with default, not explored.

Dee

To me, this is kind of like the Tab question.

In BG1, there are only a few places that I would want to reveal the map: Baldur's Gate itself, Beregost, and maybe Nashkel. Oh, and Candlekeep (obviously).

Some of the settlements like Gullykin only take up a small portion of the map, and it wouldn't make sense to show the entire map just for one small settlement.

Even Nashkel is more like a single road that cuts through the wilderness and farmland.

But I like it when a town's map is revealed to me. it gives me a greater sense that "Wow, this place is big" rather than "Wow, I have no idea what I'm looking at."

Tanthalas

@Aosaw

I think its ok to have Nashkel already explored since there are no enemies running around on the map.

RomulanPaladin

Aosaw said:

Some of the settlements like Gullykin only take up a small portion of the map, and it wouldn't make sense to show the entire map just for one small settlement.

I believe that the fog is recorded as a simple numerical flag at each sector. It'd likely be easy enough to flag the "civilized" portions as explored while leaving the rest unexplored. If I remember this stuff correctly, it might be an incredibly simple mod to make.

bigdogchris

BGT starts with Candlekeep fully explored, which I'm OK with, but nothing other than that as you have never left the city.

Boaster

Candlekeep, Beregost, Nashkel, and Baldur's Gate. I consider these cities. These are the ones that should be explored fully. Not Beregost temple, not high hedge, not the area below Beregost, not the halfling village.

Ulgoth's Beard should be revealed, perhaps.

Senash

Aosaw said:

To me, this is kind of like the Tab question.

In BG1, there are only a few places that I would want to reveal the map: Baldur's Gate itself, Beregost, and maybe Nashkel. Oh, and Candlekeep (obviously).

Oh yeah, never understood why I have to explore a place where I have been living my whole life o.O

bigdogchris

Boaster said:

... Beregost, Nashkel, and Baldur's Gate. I consider these cities. These are the ones that should be explored fully. Not Beregost temple, not high hedge, not the area below Beregost, not the halfling village.

Ulgoth's Beard should be revealed, perhaps.

Why should places that you've never been before be uncovered?

Dee

It's more a question of allowing you to see to a reasonable distance. I can stand at one end of a street and see all the way to the other end of it. I can see the tops of buildings in the background, I can see people walking around (though I might not know who they are).

Showing the entirety of a city's map would represent a person's ability to see everything in front of their own eyes, rather than things fading to black after 60 feet.

Hertz

I love the way the BG2 cities are already visible. It never made sense that I had to explore the place I've lived all my life, or that I can't see the freaking circus tent or the city walls from 100 feet away.

If it could be made an option ("automatically explore cities") that'd be awesome. Or, when you get directions from the various citizens (such as the one in Beregost) it puts them on your map.

Bytebrain

I haven't ever been able to see a complete city just by standing in it...
You must have some kind of superhuman vision...
:-)

Personally, I really like the way they do it in BG1, and even if I can see a certain distance in real life, they have to set a limit somewhere.
It would ruin the exploration aspect of the game for me, which is one of the things I most loved by in BG1...

Dee

To be honest, I'll enjoy it either way. I think showing the full map for cities makes more sense because it allows me to get a better sense of scope. But if I have to "clear the black", so to speak, I'll probably enjoy that just as much.

ryu1

Quite weird that people enjoy exploring unknown lands but when it comes to towns/cities, they want it all explored and want to know where everything is such as the nearest merchant etc. I say "Sunny or not, tis' nice to enjoy the out-of-doors."

Tanthalas

The reason why I prefer cities to already be fully discovered is because I hate the black spots on the map and its harder to clear them in cities.

Boaster

Tanthalas said:

The reason why I prefer cities to already be fully discovered is because I hate the black spots on the map and its harder to clear them in cities.

Same reason here. It's just a pain to have to small-click my way to the edge of a map, just to get to the next EXPLORABLE area.

ryu1

Tanthalas said:

The reason why I prefer cities to already be fully discovered is because I hate the black spots on the map and its harder to clear them in cities.

Good point Tanthalas. Although usually for me, any remaining black spots tend to hide plain stone walls which don't do much for me ^_^

ryu1

woohoo! New comment badge, +5 points to Gryffindor!

mlnevese

I also hate black spots. Just do an ExploreArea() before leaving for all those annoying impossible to reach black spots

Azchar111

Creating a scroll that casts 'Clairvoyance' (but usable by anyone) would work as a 'map of the city'. Make only a limited number purchasable and you'd effectively limit the use to only cities.