The DLC will be 20% the size of the world

[mpcgannon]

First of all we're not counting the underground areas. Second of all, the Weeping Peninsula is part of Limgrave. Look at the world map. Each area is color coded: Mt of giants is white, Lyndell is yellow, Liurnia blue, Caelid is red, and Limgrave is green. The Weeping Peninsula is the exact same pallet as the land it protrudes from. You look at each of these regions and they are each roughly 20% of the whole. Thus, the DLC the size of Limgrave, if not more, is going to be 20% the size of the world map. I'm willing to guess the "if not more" part refers to a new underground area. This DLC is going to be HUGE and I can't wait!!!

[SunfireKnight86]

I wouldn't care if it was 10%. $40 is pocket change and I'm happy to get more Elden Ring to help my Elden Bling.

[Aria Athena]

When they say 10 bosses, I am assuming they mean 10 unique bosses, of which the main game has about 30, not 230.

[Xengre]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από vamirez:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Xengre:

He actually did state it will have 10+ bosses.

FromSoft boss Hidetaka Miyazaki told Eurogamer

Source: https://www.eurogamer.net/elden-ring-shadow-of-the-erdtree-is-fromsoftwares-largest-expansion-ever



I never said it will. What he said, and I repeated, was...

Source: Same as above.

I never stated "the same amount of content as Limgrave" but the scale of the DLC's map per the above info from Miyazaki. I've actually been careful to clarify in any post where density arises that we don't actually know because he hasn't said whether it will have underground regions like Siofra River as part of it, or if it will be sparse or denser than X, etc. I even spoke in post #22 that size of Limgrave does not = Limgrave content with the sparsity and explained ways they may have pursued making content more dense in the same map size...

Your statement:

The DLC, itself, is stated to have around 10+ bosses. The wiki has Limgrave pegged at 22 bosses (approximately double that) and Weeping Peninsula adds another 10 (the same as the DLC, or close, on its own).

The statement you quoted from the interview:

Further, there will be over 10 new boss fights,...

Can you see the difference?

No, I cannot. I'm not sure why you are failing to grasp 10+ is the same in each statement. Can you be more explicit? :)

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από vamirez:

The second thing goes in the very same direction.

I never stated "the same amount of content as Limgrave" but the scale of the DLC's map per the above info from Miyazaki. I've actually been careful to clarify in any post where density arises that we don't actually know because he hasn't said whether it will have underground regions like Siofra River as part of it, or if it will be sparse or denser than X, etc. I even spoke in post #22 that size of Limgrave does not = Limgrave content with the sparsity and explained ways they may have pursued making content more dense in the same map size...

Yes, he was trying to give an idea of the pure surface area of the DLC map. But ppl are not discussing surface area when they claim the DLC will be small - ofc they discuss amount of content / time to complete. This includes arguing about which parts of the map would belong to Limgrave, such as the peninsula or the underground, or how large the area is compared to the world map. Because if the same area would be packed more densely with content, more time-intensive to navigate, etc. those comparisons fail. How large is the surface area of DS3?

Huh? My posts are clearly talking about Limgrave's surface area with respect to the entirety of the world of Elden Ring's "regions" including Siofra River, etc. as they're considered separate regions by the game mechanically. At the same time I've pointed out we don't know the density and we don't know if things like underground areas like Siofra River or Weeping are considered geographically part of Limgrave by Miyazaki which could heavily inflate it if that is his perspective despite being considered separate in game. I'm literally stating it could be larger than we perceive but also not depending on how Miyazaki "defines Limgrave" and stating both sides of the point.

This is entirely about surface area which is what Miyazaki is talking about because that explanation in scale does not mean the comparison fails just because one is more dense than the other. Map scale is frequently compared across games and can even be done so within Elden Ring.

Dark Souls 3 has considerable surface area, especially considering it only has Nameless Peak as a detached separate area and the overlapping zones are typically small, like Cathedral is limited to a single decent size but by no means huge building. Most of the game occurs at outdoor ground level.

It is essentially the outline of the DLC's contained area but does not quantify what is inside beyond "10+ bosses" and that is what I stuck to. I didn't try to bash it as having less because of the ridiculous price in an agenda against it nor have I tried to hype it will be bigger content than Limgrave. I tend to be very fact based and may throw out some thoughts/theories but give explanation and clarity they're not facts but merely analysis of possibility when I discuss stuff like this. I'm extremely objective and reasonable.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από vamirez:

I found this comparison on a whim, which nicely illustrates how "surface area" basically says nothing about how long a game or DLC will take to play:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eldenring/comments/v8h8k3/i_was_really_curious_how_big_elden_rings_map_is/

I'm trying to point out the difference between what Miyazaki was talking about when he tried to give an impression of the pure size of the map, and what everyone seems to be arguing about as a result. "Limgrave? What - I did that in three hours! Oh no! The peninsula? No, that's not Limgrave. It will be just the starting area." And so on. That is what is going on in the heads of folks here.

vamirez, did you have an actual point you were trying to make because it appears you do not but just wanted to find a way to argue but were unable to actually dispute my raised points. I'm at a loss here.

I'm not sure how the link you post is relevant of someone comparing two different things incorrectly without gauging if all of DSIII maps had the same scale (they tested a single location), especially when Dark Souls 3's how long to beat playtime is considerably longer than Limgrave's section, even including Weeping. I'm really just not sure what you were aiming for in tha or how it is relevant, either, because the design of DSIII's map is vastly more intricate than your typical overworld map plus nothing I've said goes on to state the intricacy or density of the DLC as certain facts. Instead, I actually discuss purely theoretically how they could potentially increase its density and playtime despite having the same scale of Limgrave which was relatively open and wasteful.

Here is what I actually said on page 2 post #22:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Xengre:

They did already clarify its scale at least flat wise and in terms of dungeons, kind of, though they haven't really spoken about verticality or if there will be giant regions underneath like Siofra River. They also could have made routes not as just straight forward but with lots of mountains and other things to block and control your route to increase control over your path and this could enhance the amount of content if done correctly with a more zig-zaggy filled up path vs a wide open sparse path. Hard to say since they didn't clarify, but it will be interesting to see. I wish they were clear about number of legacy dungeons and scale since they're not all equal and they only suggested at least one but left it open to interpret as more (like 2).

I discuss actual scale of landmass factually then I start discussing possible level design approach 'possibilities' (not fact) using phrasing like "could have made" and "Hard to say since they didn't clarify", etc. Here I'm clearly talking about one way they could make it denser despite using the same surface area.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από vamirez:

I don't know how "big" the DLC will actually be either. But those biased speculations that basically see the info that was given as negative and do not use quotes from the interview correctly seem to be just finding ways to bash the new FS thing no matter what... And many will just believe the incorrect quoting or interpretation of others and not check out the source themselves.

As we can see I discussed and quoted properly not trying to give it as negatives, only giving realistic facts and tampering expectations like it isn't 20% of the game. I only spoke of the surface area as facts and never at any point understated the surface area. I correctly stated the 10+ bosses and even now your point there leaves me confused, and I've discussed ways they could theoretically (no quote, no fact because its not clear) make it denser but stated we don't know if it is denser or not.

Again, what is the point of your post because I'm genuinely lost.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Aria Athena:

When they say 10 bosses, I am assuming they mean 10 unique bosses, of which the main game has about 30, not 230.

While not impossible this is highly unlikely. That would have been something to be pretty clear about and with little reason to be vague, especially when it can actually harm expectations of their product not being clear and underselling it substantially.

[Zogtar]

This whole thread screams:

"I have a structured settlement and I need cash now."

[vamirez]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Xengre:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από vamirez:

Your statement:



The statement you quoted from the interview:


Can you see the difference?

No, I cannot. I'm not sure why you are failing to grasp 10+ is the same in each statement. Can you be more explicit? :)

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Aria Athena:

When they say 10 bosses, I am assuming they mean 10 unique bosses, of which the main game has about 30, not 230.

While not impossible this is highly unlikely. That would have been something to be pretty clear about and with little reason to be vague, especially when it can actually harm expectations of their product not being clear and underselling it substantially.

This goes together. Let's begin with this part. I foretell we won't be able to get past it.

10+ new boss fights does not mean 10+ total boss fights. If you can't follow that, you have a problem. I don't believe that, tho.

And why is it high unlikely? From the way it is phrased it is almost certainly what is meant by "10 new boss fights". You deliberately try to deny the actual meaning of what was said here. You can see some of the bosses in the trailer. Are you telling us we will encounter, for example, the burning wicker man three times and this counts towards the "10+"? Or will "three old bosses at once" constitute "a new boss fight". Seriously?

[mpcgannon]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Zogtar:

This whole thread screams:

"I have a structured settlement and I need cash now."

It's mah muny an I wan'it naaaaaaaaaw

[mpcgannon]

Xengre and vamirez whoa! I need cliff notes. But I am interested.
What's a good text to speech?

[vamirez]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από mpcgannon:

Xengre and vamirez whoa! I need cliff notes. But I am interested.
What's a good text to speech?

I try not to be as verbose as him and started by answering to the first point. But he always dumps these walls of text to crush any arguments with the sheer amount of blathering...

[Aria Athena]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Xengre:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Aria Athena:

When they say 10 bosses, I am assuming they mean 10 unique bosses, of which the main game has about 30, not 230.

While not impossible this is highly unlikely. That would have been something to be pretty clear about and with little reason to be vague, especially when it can actually harm expectations of their product not being clear and underselling it substantially.

Miyazaki underselling their product? Never.

"Over 10 new bosses to fight", I don't find that vague. It's not going to be an Ulcerated Tree Spirit, let alone some regular dude with a boss health bar.

[vamirez]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Aria Athena:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Xengre:

While not impossible this is highly unlikely. That would have been something to be pretty clear about and with little reason to be vague, especially when it can actually harm expectations of their product not being clear and underselling it substantially.

Miyazaki underselling their product? Never.

"Over 10 new bosses to fight", I don't find that vague. It's not going to be an Ulcerated Tree Spirit, let alone some regular dude with a boss health bar.

Exactly.

[mpcgannon]

How would you folks feel about recycled areas? What I mean is Stormveil castle but an alternate version with different pathing?

[Amanita]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από rabureta:

Reminder that he also said the base game was only 30 hours.

And he was correct. Even shorter than that in ng+ The base game is short. Its the side areas that are take hours to explore.

[mpcgannon]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Amanita:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από rabureta:

Reminder that he also said the base game was only 30 hours.

And he was correct. Even shorter than that in ng+ The base game is short. Its the side areas that are take hours to explore.

Nice! So if this logic tracks, we get a DLC with the plot the size of Limgrave, 10 ( + ) bosses, and that doesn't count ANY of the side areas. This DLC will be MASSIVE.

[SotiCoto]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από mpcgannon:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από SotiCoto:

So the DLC is overpriced as hell AND tiny?
This is... not reassuring.

Bogus take. Without playing it or seeing a complete play through, no one can say it's over / under priced nor can they say it's too sparse.

40 is Full Game sorta price, not expansion sorta price. I'm reluctant to pay more than £20 for full games, let alone anything lesser, so 40 would be in my "wait for 50% off" range unless it is Monster Hunter or Dragon's Dogma... and FromSoft don't do the bigger-than-base-game super expansions that the Monster Hunter series are known for, so it definitely won't be worth the price of a full game.
And I'm just a dabbler in FromSoft. I'm sure plenty of the more in-detail examiners will be able to make an accurate guess of the size of the DLC just from the trailer alone.

Or in other words: The "we don't know anything about it because it isn't out yet" take is bullsh!t. A LOT can be extrapolated from what we do already know.

[Lord Bob]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από mpcgannon:

How would you folks feel about recycled areas? What I mean is Stormveil castle but an alternate version with different pathing?

Yes please. Specifically Stormveil is an amazing legacy dungeon and probably the best one next to Farum Azula, in my opinion. It's one of the only fully featured castles this game has to offer and another one just like it would be highly appreciated by me.