duane wrote: ↑Sun Nov 22, 2020 02:02
While these innovations I've seen in the last few months are amazing, I have to wonder how practical they are. As much as I love pretty scenery, it tends to get in the way of game play, which ideally gives you as much flat terrain to build on and hunt in as possible. You mostly want scenery to be a sort of sky box around the real game.
As for enlarging the world, I've never (in several years of play) managed to reach a border yet -- in any direction. Of course, I never really tried, but the real problem for most players is that the world is too big already. I hate having to slog through endless forest or jungle to get to something different. Making the scale more realistic would just make the problem of boredom worse.
Anyway, that's my view of it. ;)
I see your point, but I have a different feeling about it.
Like some others here, I like to explore, travel long distances, immerse myself in the world, and in some way give every place a feeling. I find that when for example the biomes vary too much at small scale, the landscape looks squeezed, there is no consistency, and no incentive or reward for going further away. I need to feel myself in a large open world, and fully live the scenery, not feeling in a skybox.
About the "practicability" of my rivers mapgen, I think it can be a matter of parameters in some cases. If someone wants more flat areas, it is possible to find appropriate parameters. If they want smaller-scale features, it is possible to a certain extent, but it is true that my mapgen is not adapted to very small scales. It is based on catchment basins to define rivers, but this is basically meaningless if the continents are too small, this will result in no or few rivers.
----------
From a test server by Gundul: