#A New Map or a Rework of an Old Map ....

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

west brook
#

Since a rework of an older map takes about the same amount of time as a new map, Which would you rather have ?? More importantly would you be willing to pay for a full map rework?

Vote up 👍 if you would be willing to pay or 👎 if you wouldn't be willing to pay for this

Lets define a map rework.... A map rework would include reworking the landscape and graphical objects as well as some of the animal species on those maps. Including back filling those older maps with newer species. This would also mean a reset of the reworked map. Any reworked animal species would carry over to other maps that also have those animals....

Again the real question is would you be willing to pay for this and how much?

I really feel like this is the only way we will get some of these older reserves updated and species reworks we have been asking for … and If there are enough willing to pay for it that could be incentivize EW to do it ….

west brook
#

I would defiantly pay for a rework of older maps like Savanna, Hirsch, Layton, SRP or Yukon

#

EW could run a poll like they did previously with the community weapon pack asking which map we would like to see reworked first .....

lunar quest
#

The only problem is multiplayer would there be like new Layton and old Layton or what

muted anvil
west brook
#

dont know what the issue is with some older maps and MP but I would assume that would be fixed with the map rework

vapid abyss
#

I admit that I too couldn't really pay for a completely redone map. Because even if it is 100% improved, for me it would be as if I was wasting money for nothing, because it turns out it will cost more. But doing it little by little would be good like that, we can see the before and after from there while playing. But otherwise I like the overall idea, I'm not against it.

lost lily
#

I think I'd just rather see what they've done with the new nepal map again. New map, new species, but a couple old ones who where able to get remodeled. I'd be willing to pay I suppose (it is still work that they deserve to get given money for), since potential better zone locations for species i like is near enough to make me buy a new map, but I'd rather them just do that type of thing.

#

Like I'd just rather see Africa 2.0 with lions just getting their much needed model update where we have a new map with new species and the like then a savannah rework, even if it is a bit sad that savannah is noticeably dated compared to the current work EW puts out.

#

I’d love to see them get some new life breathed into them but if it’s between an old map getting reworked and a new map and a few old animals get reworked that are being added to that map, I’d rather the latter, I think.

Wouldn’t complain much if they did rework a map, but again just think I lean new maps.

west brook
#

I think we all would prefer to have this work done over time for free …. But lets look at EW's actions just recently

They did a very good new Nepal map that highlights for us some increasing talent and skill in creating animals and environments that they obviously didn't have 5 to 7 years ago and at an increased price.

Announcing that all future new maps will have an increase in price. We also see them recently pushing pushing out cosmetics and IMO meaningless community weapons packs

This at a time when we already have plentiful cosmetics as well as plentiful weapons.... to the point that I would argue any new weapons are just cosmetic variations of weapons we already have .

So why are they doing all this? What is the common denominator? The increase in the cost of new maps? More cosmetic and weapons DLC ? Could it be money?

And I'm not blaming EW for this they have a business to run … As someone who knows what it's like to own a business the costs are staggering …. In most cases a business losses 30% to 50% of their revenue to taxes every year

Then you have the actual operational expenses on top of that before you can even begin to make a profit ….

So in EW actions I see a company who is focusing on how to make more money which all successful business must do if they want to keep their doors open and produce a good quality product.

So I don't personally have a problem with paying for improvements or reworks based on new current day technology advances... I'm glad they are taking steps to make improvements

And now I would like to see those improvements applied to maps and animals that havent been touched in several years.... But I dont see them doing that if we expected it to be done for free ….

So what would the cost of a map rework be? …. I'll talk about that in this thread a little later …..

lost lily
#

its mainly just to me that if we're getting map reworks, its a whole year for in the end, a reworked map we already have. its not just getting a reworked map, its also taking up the time for a new one and as stated id just rather have a new one due to what i said, but hey, if they do do it, maybe the reworks will knock my socks off so hard it wont matter 🤔

west brook
#

I'm not suggestion that they do a rework instead of a new map .... I'm kind of hoping we could maybe have 1 rework and one new map every year . but the rework would be a purchaseable DLC

vapid abyss
#

ha okay, I absolutely agree with you then. It would be great if anyone could do that, because it could greatly improve the gameplay a bit.

livid geode
#

hirschfelden could really benefit from a rework it has a really high mountains (maybe also move the map border a bit so there is more room to hunt up there ) wich have no animals and hard to reach course they are designed as a natural map border . having alpine species like ibex or chamois up there and a rework of this mountain could bring a new twist to this map

1717877017147-20240608213401_1.png 1717877017180-20240608213620_1.png
#

maybe a dynamic weather system to so it would snow up there 🤔

lost lily
# west brook I'm not suggestion that they do a rework instead of a new map .... I'm kind of...

ahhhhhhh yeah okay i see, im just usnure if that would work with workload, but im not in their team so i cant theorize on that lol i just figured itd have to be one or the other, given that’d just be back to the old 6 month per map schedule type deal and I do prefer the year long round one to give maps up to the quality of the Nepal one

if that is the case (big if due to above), then yes, id have no real reservations about them and id be fine paying for them. Just feel like it’s a big if.

pale nimbus
#

I already buy their content as is when they release so I wouldn't go out of my way to buy a seperate version of the same map twice however a subscription I would consider paying for over a season pass. Most MMORPG's use this as fluent cash flow while also adding benefits to their players for having it. As an example if you got an EW Sub it would provide you extra $$$ & XP free access to Maps & Cosmetics as a base level. Next tier would include weapon packs. 1Mo. 3mo, 6mo, or a year depending on how EW would break it down. In addition to the topic you could choose to Sub for either TheHunter or TheAngler or alittle bit more and get both. If I lost anyone let me know, but the idea would provide us the players benefits to having it and EW would get more funding to expand there team and efforts to both add content and fix issues. Your thoughts?

floral leaf
# pale nimbus I already buy their content as is when they release so I wouldn't go out of my w...

Eh, no thanks, I've played Fishing planet and they have that kind of "pay for xp" plan. It's not good. Personally I wouldn't mind paying for a rework.

Let's say they add 3$ to the map price in the store and a 1.50$ charge for the updated map. I wouldn't hesitate. The maps they do now are well worth the extra price and getting an old map with a bit more polish and care would be worth it to me.

Considering the aren't starting from scratch when they rebuild an old map I'd expect they could update one in 6 to 8 months and still have a new map to offer later in the year

pale nimbus
# floral leaf Eh, no thanks, I've played Fishing planet and they have that kind of "pay for xp...

Fishing planet is a whole different animal then what I'm proposing. Here let me try to explain it better. So maps are currently going to be $11 or so, add-ons are roughly $8 cosmetics $3-5 = $25 give or take as of now. $29.99 yearly sub or $39.99 yearly if your suggesting $3 for a rework. This would still be affordable and you get the content for the year with an additional bonus that EW or community (If we had the option to choose) finds to be fair. We get content and they get some additional funding to add more support to the team & development.

west brook
#

Yeah I'm hoping it might work out to one rework and one new map every year .... As far as price goes some maps would take take more time and some a little less .... It would really be a matter of letting EW set the price .... I was kind of thinking a reworked map with some animal reworks as well as back fills might cost $6 to 7$ ???

floral leaf
west brook
bronze schooner
#

A rework to Yukon with dall sheep, mountain goats, Roosevelt elk, Sitka blacktail and black bears would be cool. Not sure exactly if the mountain goat and blacktail would be good fits in terms of realism though for that area

floral leaf
bronze schooner
#

Fair point

floral leaf
#

I really wouldn't mind seeing Yukon get another go. I was playing there the other day and thinking how empty the Goldcap Bluff area feels when areas like that are loaded with deer irl.

pale nimbus
#

As JJ said it does come down to funding. But my question to you is if your willing to buy dlc's that would total to $25 or so with the new pricing between a map, weapon/equipment pack, & cosmetics and an additional $7 for a rework &/or backfill your now looking at $32 total spent?! So if thats the case why would you be against paying a yearly$39.99 optional Yearly Subscription to recieve all the content and a possible 2x XP & Money boost? And it doesn't even have to be a 2x bonus, it could instead be a new lodge, weapon, gear etc. As the additional for having it.

#

I think this a fair suggestion that not only covers new content it also feeds reworks & backfills in one package that is completely optional to those who wish to do so. And if they did release separate rework/backfill content in the store to purchase you can do so. This allows players the freedom to choose whats best for them. Sub or individual purchases. And I'm referring to all platforms "console(s) & pc".

west brook
#

Yes at the same time this is still a 7 year old niche product and the players are used to paying a certain amount so EW would have to be careful on how this was priced ...

I do feel that this might be the only way that we will see some of these updates and reworks done in a timely manner ....

floral leaf
vapid abyss
#

What you need if you change the maps, you should first start with the oldest to the most recent. Afterwards as you wish. But I want to have a beautiful mountain on Hirshfelden with little marmots hiding here and there or beautiful ibexes or Hecks' Aurochs, as other big critters (these are the only other big critters that I know in Germany )

west brook
#

@floral leaf ..... Vurhonga would be the top of my list and then probably Hirsch .... I would be ok if they did a community poll to decide ....

floral leaf
#

For me, medved, vurhonga, and Hirsch in that order, but Layton would be a nice swap.

Vurhonga needs this worse than most, but medved just has so few animals

abstract aurora
#

i would pay for like a complete rework dlc, one where multiple old maps got revamped, but there’s no way id pay for individual map reworks i feel like that’s crazy

pale nimbus
# west brook Yes at the same time this is still a 7 year old niche product and the players ar...

N I get where your coming from its a 7yr old game that might stay till 2027 however I'm also looking at the revenue factor for a fresh new title as well around 2028-29ish with an up to date system n program. It was brought to my attention this is the 2nd game of TheHunter I'm guessing pc had the 1st game let me know. But my point is at the existing $25 of content 100k players buy it its 2.5million in content buys a yr. At lets say $5mo for a sub with full access to content in a yr yes it would be $60 a yr however it would cover $25(Map, Gear/Wpn pk, cosmetic), $10 Rework $10 Backfill $15Maintenance Bug Fixes. 100k player with a $5mo sub would be 6million a yr.......its a huge difference and this feeds the company to get more ppl on the team to work on a lot more content as well as the bugs we all want more effectively than a skeleton crew. It would also lead towards a 3rd TheHunter title thats up to date with alot more features we want that might not be possible with this one. And the sub is optional and monthly so you could easily cancel and buy individual content if you wanted to instead. But from a new players perspective would you rather buy $100+ of content or $5mo?. By itself yea it doesn't add much however if you get players up to 2-3k or so its still more revenue. Honestly its no risk to them bc ppl will still buy dlc's individually.

#

I want to see more in the game like everyone else and I'm willing to pay for it bc I love this game but it has way more potential. But you know as well as I do its not cheap to do so. I'm shocked the content has remained low this long bc they could easily make it $24.99 a map in current market dlc's. N they have it at $11 a map is remarkable.

west brook
#

Well i cant speak to EW and thier ability to do what you are suggesting .... I just went with a simple approach using a pricing structure and plan that is similar to what the players are already used to seeing ..... Its easier for them to understand that way ..... Bottom line we both agree more revenue for EW means that some of these things the players have been asking for are more likely to be implemented ....

pale nimbus
#

I couldn't agree more.

#

And I understand ppl hesitating at the idea of a Sub due to 80% of games are cash grabs with micro transactions. EW doesn't use that logic and I'm so glad they're not but I do try to keep up with the streams and listen to the behind the scenes talk and I look at the current market and tech. And yea they are small but ethical to the community but....sadly its still business if they want to keep the doors open. I'm willing to support that bc they have a fantastic product, its not perfect but it has so much potential to grow into top tier.

pale nimbus
pale nimbus
pale nimbus
modest turret
#

I'd pay a few bucks to have SRP, Layton, and Revontuli in full winter like Medved 🏔️

west brook
#

Would you Pay for a rework of some of your older favorite maps ????

You would still have access to the original version of the map but would pay for the rework ???

The dlc rework could include a variation in animals .... so as not to be an exact duplicate of the original ....

amber pier
#

Maybe instead of reworking the maps they could just sell packs that add the "dlc backfillers" into the old maps at their current graphical standards? idk, hirschfelden is janky since its an old map but I love it as it is. Id like to see the animals remastered and more species added in, but i dont think the maps needs to be optimal for efficiency and all that