so we can finally agree that the most server resource-friendly implementation would be to just have one zone per gamestate & intance that has to be loaded and calaculated instead of loading additinal more, while the player just can be in one zone at a time?
No, that depends how large the zones are. If the entire game world were treated as a single zone to be loaded, that would take significantly more resources than if it were just the current zones (& similarly, if the current zones were cut into smaller areas then they would take less resources again).
i think i expressed myself in false way as i said
the point was that having just one small zone as it is now in the game vs additional more where the player could go to, if the world is seemless.
for example:
when you just have that small zone/level e.g. temple of eterra then is clear what and how many entities are in and that zone and can be loaded by server/ client immediatly. now the server can focus on validating the players input and don’t need to care about loading other zones with all its entities while the player travere through the zone. having the server to load zones where the player could be, while the player just can be in one, would be a huge overhead.
Well, yes.
This approach is simpler for an engine, devs and their and player’s machine resources. But in this case player’s time is sacrificed (loading screens).
I think the thing with LE is that most of the maps I can think of would be perfectly conducive to a “seamless world” type of approach. Because generally there are only single entry and exit points (or maybe a couple), so the amount of “pre-loading” or whatever you want to call it is a fixed, known quantity. One of the most egregious examples I can think of is when you approach the ship, I think in the Imperial era. You get a load screen to the dock, walk like 10 seconds, encounter like 3 enemies, then have to load again to get onto the boat. I’m assuming that “map” is just some sort of placeholder, and they intend to have more content there, but otherwise it just feels like such a break in continuity that really doesn’t add anything. Another one is when you are collecting the left and right things at the end of the first era. You get the timeshift load just to walk a few steps and grab the thing, then load again. It’s really non-sensical.
It’s really not a big deal to me, I was just thinking how odd it was that the state-of-the-art has gone backwards over time, even though processing power, RAM, hard drive speed/space has progressed so much further. The environments look a lot better now, but are they really 10-100 times better? Frankly I’d trade bells and whistles like extra lighting and shadow effects for the illusion of seamlessness, but that’s just a personal preference.
1 Like
Don’t forget that the number of pixels that’s having stuff done to them has increased significantly, from, say 320x240 (QVGA, 76,800 pixels) up to 3840x2160 (4k, 8,294,400), that’s 108 times the number of pixels, plus they’re doing a lot more with those pixels.
1 Like
I just posted a similar suggestion on Discord and was directed here.
I do not think LE has to be Open World (though I would prefer it) but IMO the level design needs to feel way more open. As it is the level design in LE is I believe the weakest element of the game. Everything feels like a corridor with a circular connection or branch added. To be honest it is really dull and very claustrophobic. That is OK for some areas maybe but really the area designs need to be greatly improved and way more open feeling. Even in POE and D2 a lot of the areas are open. To be quit honest I think ARPGs should be more influenced in terms of level design by Sacred and Divine Divinty than POE and Diablo and GD. As it is level design is probably the weakest element of the game
1 Like
The advantage is that you’re not wondering where to go. I’m here to slay monsters, not to walk on all sided searching for them. For this, I do not like open worlds. But I know my opinion is a minority one. 
A good example for an open feeling world was / is World of Warcraft. They have loading screens only when it’s necessary. With their layering technic they could even change the world for single players (during quests).
The game is very old - isn’t all this available in current engines?
I don’t know if you read the original post in detail, but both Titan Quest and Diablo 2 are probably better examples since they are in the same ARPG category. And both pre-date WoW as well… not to mention Diablo 2 added the twist of having randomized portions of maps.
The point made by @Llama8 about 4K resolutions, etc is good, so perhaps there is an issue trying to pre-load with that in mind. I am very excited to see how the new Diablo 2 remaster performs and plays, as it should re-establish an interesting baseline comparison for this type of technology.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.