Official Everybody Edits Forums

jakery

Guest

400 x 200 mini map change

The 400 x 200 mini map covers too much of the play screen. I have some possible solutions:

1) Show a cropped area of the map with your player in the center. The map's visible area scrolls with you as you move in the level. Players can drag the edges of the map to resize the visible area.
Pros: Keep the 1 block = 1 pixel map scale.
Cons: Players can't see the whole map at once unless they block a large portion of the play screen.

2) Shrink the map to {1.5 blocks squared = 1 pixel} or even {2 blocks squared = 1 pixel}.
Pros: The map is small enough that it doesn't obstruct the play screen.
Cons: The map would look fuzzy and lose detail; pixel art wouldn't look good anymore

3) Partially transparent map
Pros: See the whole play area and have the map at the same time.
Cons: Neither the map nor the play area underneath is fully visible.

4) Some combination of the previous ideas: An option to zoom the map in or out, or to change the map's transparency, or change the "window" size of the map.
Pros: Every player can customize the map view to the way they like it.
Cons: Too many options can detract from the user experience. (Apple lives by this motto and they're doing pretty well)

Last edited by jakery (Mar 18 2011 1:29:34 pm)

mrvalley

Guest

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

yes, the map for the great worlds gets in the way a lot, and closing it doesn't really help as you still need to know where you should go next.

Gamer1120

Member

Joined: 2015-12-29

Posts: 2,659

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

It should be done, not only for this, but for the future map types (50 x 400, tall world) too

Panic

Member

From: Virgo Supercluster

Joined: 2015-05-26

Posts: 1,114

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

For idea 2, you need 4 blocks/pixel since that is the next square number after 1.
You don't want 1.2247448713915890490986420373529 blocks squared for one pixel, or 1.4142135623730950488016887242097 blocks squared.
That would just look weird.

---

Obligatory piece of text placed here forcing you to load an extra 100 bytes of data per post I make.

Volker

Guest

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

no

Different55

Forum Admin

Joined: 2015-02-07

Posts: 16,574

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

Volker, put some meaning behind your post. One-word posts are frowned upon by the people here.

---

"Sometimes failing a leap of faith is better than inching forward"
- ShinsukeIto

JadElClemens

Member

From: Colorado, USA

Joined: 2015-02-15

Posts: 4,559

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

I think the 2 blocks/1 pixel (he means horizontally only) idea is good, not a lot of people get great worlds to do pixel art

---

I hate tall signatures.

jakery

Guest

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

I think the 2 blocks/1 pixel (he means horizontally only) idea is good, not a lot of people get great worlds to do pixel art

Erm... I didn't mean to imply that the scaling would be horizontal only; I wouldn't want a distorted map. But I guess it is another potential solution.

Panic

Member

From: Virgo Supercluster

Joined: 2015-05-26

Posts: 1,114

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

We need a better scale. I said 4 blocks a pixel. With the horizontal idea, it would have a mini-map the size of a massive world's, but everything would look stupid. If you were making pointless pixel art, everything would look a lot thinner.

---

Obligatory piece of text placed here forcing you to load an extra 100 bytes of data per post I make.

Wezza

Guest

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

this would screw up ee art, i think its good like it is now. just minimize the map when ur playing.

else an other idea could be to only show a 50x50 or 100x100 area around you in the minimap

jakery

Guest

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

this would screw up ee art, i think its good like it is now. just minimize the map when ur playing.

else an other idea could be to only show a 50x50 or 100x100 area around you in the minimap

I like playing with the map open, which is only a problem in 400x200 levels. The idea of showing a 50x50 or 100x100 area around your player was my #1 suggestion in the original post, but you worded it much better.

Edit:

We need a better scale. I said 4 blocks a pixel.

Yeah, that's what I was trying to suggest when I said "2 blocks squared," which would be 4 blocks per pixel. Sometimes I'm not good at wording my ideas.

Last edited by jakery (Mar 22 2011 2:49:08 pm)

Cyclopsicle

Guest

Re: 400 x 200 mini map change

Nice Sig
OT: Well I think this would be a great suggestion and I personally like #4