JarlFrank
I like Thief THIS much
Jeff is old and tired and lost his creative spark. He's just phoning it in at this point.
Jeff is like ten years younger than crispy, the only reason you think he is old is he has been doing his old man routine for 20 years. Hopefully the decline is just growing pains and he follows the pattern of Avadon series with the first entry being kind of trash and the second and beyond being a better return to form.Jeff is old and tired and lost his creative spark. He's just phoning it in at this point.
It reminds me of the old Wizard of Oz maps.the overmap is actually insulting in just how low effort it is (just look at that fucking map. What the actual fuck is that, even a middle schooler could draw something more interesting than three rectangles joined in the middle)
Funny thing is, it's basic shape is nearly identical to the Queen's Wish one - three square-ish areas joined at the center square. It's just more embellished.This is some lazy shit that looks to have been put together in less than 10 minutes or something, just like every other aspect in the game. It must have taken 2 minutes to come up with those random locations and gibberish names. Less and less fucks are given with each release.
I'll leave this map here for comparison, to add some much needed prestige to this thread.
I had to google that.Yoshi from Mario
Funny thing is, it's basic shape is nearly identical to the Queen's Wish one - three square-ish areas joined at the center square. It's just more embellished.
I mean the general shapes of the lands. Not the coastline, but the way the bulk of the landmass is distributed:Funny thing is, it's basic shape is nearly identical to the Queen's Wish one - three square-ish areas joined at the center square. It's just more embellished.
Nah, I don't see it. Even forcing a bit and turning the map into straight lines to try and define its main contours, structurally, it is still extremely different from Vogel's map.
It actually looks a lot like the meeting of South America with North America if you "erase" Central America from the map. It seems that two "blocks" of land collided, with a continental plate coming from south to north - this even justifies the mountain chain that cuts the map in a horizontal direction near the center. Which makes perfect sense, even if it wasn't something intentional, the map is coherent and makes a lot of sense.
Possibly the fact that this is not a map of the world, but shows only a piece of the continents, helps a bit. I don't know if the map would remain coherent if it showed the whole extent of the world - but one way or another, what matters is the end result.
As you can see, there's very little water inside the four squares I drew (I wouldn't really count the inland sea as such), and very little land that protrudes outside of them. Sure, it doesn't fit as neatly as Vogel's map, mostly because of the left landmass that's a trapeze rather than a rectangle. And sure, it's partly because the edges of the map cut through the continents, in one case even on two sides.
I mean the general shapes of the lands. Not the coastline, but the way the bulk of the landmass is distributed:
As you can see, there's very little water inside the four squares I drew (I wouldn't really count the inland sea as such), and very little land that protrudes outside of them. Sure, it doesn't fit as neatly as Vogel's map, mostly because of the left landmass that's a trapeze rather than a rectangle. And sure, it's partly because the edges of the map cut through the continents, in one case even on two sides.
No, you can't really.Yes, if you make rectangles on maps you can find areas where there will be a lot of land and little water, you can do that even on the map of our world, too.
It's landmasses do not approximate to rectangular areas nearly as well as Realms Beyond do. The top-right one has at least 30% water, and the bottom-left one, something like 60%. Not to mention the whole archipelago on the bottom-right.
I did that in the original post:What you originally said was that "the basic shape is nearly identical". I then need you to define what "basic shape" is for you.
three square-ish areas joined at the center square
Now that you've mentioned, it does look similar when it comes to the general layout... However, Realms Beyond's map layout predates Vogel's masterpiece, they posted bits of it even before comissioning a graphic artist to do the current version.
I will. The closest real-world analogue to the Realms Beyond map would be probably Southern Europe:Yes, if you make rectangles on maps you can find areas where there will be a lot of land and little water, you can do that even on the map of our world, too. I won't waste my time doing this
You can kinda square off Iberia and France, but then Italy and the Adriatic will give you a lot of problems.
I will.
The closest real-world analogue to the Realms Beyond map would be probably Southern Europe:
It has two squar-ish areas (Iberia and France) connected by a comparatively narrow land bridge. There's a third one, Italy, which is also narrowly connected, but not squarish. I couldn't find one with four landmasses meeting in a center, it's not very geologically feasible.On what principle are you stating this?
The first one doesn't work because there's too much land outside of squares, especially the Great Lakes are.