File talk:Nicholas the Traveler The Falls map.jpg

Screens

I'm going to have to say I like the one with the collectors as on the map better, it seems much better quality and gives points where I can look too and the path seems much clearer. IMO the one you keep reverting back too, I wish you hadn't.--74.138.98.45 02:44, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

How is the path "more clear"? Look at the micro picture... The red dots are dull and barely visible (not to mention pixelated and blurry). The revised map shows the direct route to Nicholas from the portal all the way to him-- there is no possible way to get lost. On the collectors note, well, they honestly don't give that much help in locating Nicholas. Having ran to him myself earlier this morning, and, being the one who that picture was taken by, I can say that the only collector who could possibly "help" is the one whom is located right next to Nicholas. As mentioned already, the path to Nicholas is straight forward and there is only ONE fork in the road (and even so you just keep going straight). -Lena talk 07:27, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I prefer the explored map over the current one; having everything else from the map uncovered and having some reference points (collectors) in there helps a lot more. That way you can look at the map, see the collectors, remember that and simply go to the point without having to look at the map at each fork.. And I don't see what you mean about blurry map and micro picture.. The map is exactly at the same zoom level and size (just a bit more); are you sure that the version you look at is not just broken by the wiki cache? poke | talk 13:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Both look about the same quality to me. --JonTheMon 13:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

This: File:Micro-Picture.jpg

This is what I was reffering to by "micro-picture". The small icon on the page that you see when not clicking it. -Lena talk 16:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I prefer the explored one. Honestly, it seems you're in a minority, son. 76.114.66.99 20:12, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Son? Who the hell are you calling son? You are not not my father, kid. And fyi, being in the "minority" doesn't essentially make it "right". This IS a wiki, afterall-- shit noobs come on and defend eachother against exp'ed people all the time. Welcome to the internet. -Lena talk 20:37, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

I still don't get where that image is looking better... poke | talk 20:54, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The two images are similar in size (the explored one being slightly bigger, meaning the red path is slightly smaller in the infobox). However, the explored one has points of reference for people travelling through that area (e.g. "oh look, it's under that mound" or "at the green patch, take a right" or "it's about 3cm below that collector and 5cm to the left of the res shrine"). That's how people travel - I don't think many just follow the red path dot for dot, because it's a hassle having to look at the map every second and not at the game itself. The explored map has more information on it and, being a wiki, we prefer more information to less information. If the infobox size is such a major issue, the thumbnail can be resized with no problem. Besides, I imagine people usually click the image to make it larger. Explored map > unexplored map. -- Brains12 \ talk 20:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

How about something more complete like this? I like when they start from a town / outpost....

-- Chrono (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I really like the one Chrono made, but it might be too detailed to see when it's shrunken down on the main page. Otherwise, the current version (with the whole map revealed) is the better one, I believe. --★KOKUOU★ 10:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

i also like this one better, simply because it's only half the map when not starting from an outpost. the current one still shows the exact location in the area, but the path to that one is useful as well. —ZerphaThe Improver 15:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)