Size of the map

[wolfedg]

I have noticed a lot of complaints about the seeming lack of progress of ATS on these forums and thought I would do a bit of research for you all to address them. I have copiled a list of the areas of the states thus far as well as a comparison with certain European countries. Now that the scale is the same between ETS 2 and ATS it is fair to make direct comparisons. So lets look at the data.

First we have the states thus far.
Area Region Rank/48
3,119,884 sq. mi. Total Lower 48 ----
163,695 California 3
110,560 Nevada 7
(274,255 Sq. Mi At release)
113,988 Arizona 6
(388,243 Sq. Mi After AZ release)
121,589 New Mexico 5
(509,832 Sq. Mi After NM Release)

Now I made a list of European countries that put together roughtly comprise the same total area. I had to convert the below list from Sq. Km. and i truncated anything after the decimal point. Please feel free to check my numbers and math as I'm not above error.
ETS 2 Locations
137,846 Germany
211,209 France
94,058 U.K.
32,377 Austria
15,942 Switzerland
11,779 Belgium
(503,211 Sq. Mi. Total for these countries)
<img>http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w424/wolfedg/europe1.jpg</img>
The green area represents the included countries in the lis (If someone could overlay this over a proper map of the ETS 2 game it would be useful to this thread :) )
I think based on this data that the developers have been progressing at least as well as they have previously in ETS II. I personally see no cause for concern in their porgress but of course some may disagree.


Sources:
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/area.shtml
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_and_population_of_European_countries (Converted Sq Km to Sq Mi and truncated at decimal point)
http://www.drodd.com/html7/blank-map-of-europe.html

EDIT: I just realized the size numbers for the states are not out of 48 but out of the whole U.S. Aka Alaska is # 1 texas #2 California #3 etc

[Gizmosellsbunnys]

Not too concerned, Arizona is size of Germany almost and New Mexico is bigger than Arizona slightly. People complain about the lack of green, but the reality it does not really green up all over till 100w meridian in longitude. Most of western USA is stepple which is semi-arid or desert. Wyoming I-80 looks similar to Nevada with red-rock desert between Rock Springs and Rawlins some think it should be green like Euro Truck. Want green go to Europe hahaha

[Gazer75]

The area calculation is a bit off. Only like 1/3 of European France is used in base ETS2 so it is not going to be over 200K sq. miles. Really need the France DLC to count it all.
Maybe it is ok as you're missing Netherlands and northern part of Italy.

If you add New Mexico then you should also add Going East, Scandinavia and France DLCs for ETS2 in comparison.

Estimate Scandinavia DLC to cover around 250K sq. km (96.5K sq. mi)

Going east adds Slovakia, Czech Republic and Poland which is around 441K sq. km (170 sq. mi)

[Rookie-31st]

Comparing existing road lengths instead of areas would be more accurate since SCS recreates only terrain next to roads. On the same area, denser road net would require more effort

[wolfedg]

@Rookie that is a fair asessment, however If you add the details they have to cities I think it may be a fair trade.

@Gazer I picked the countries I did to represent the same area in the U.S. not to compare the total areas. DLC or no, France is a part of ETS 2 and as it was a useful size comparison and a similar development workload especially the DLC) i included it.I'm just implying people should consider all the development into those areas.

[Iridium]

While we're here, isn't the UK at a slightly larger scale than the rest of ETS2/ATS? Not that it really makes a huge difference, especially when the UK may well be one of the least well-done areas of ETS2 anyhow.

Either way, we can consider the following alternative comparison. All units are in square miles. Some concessions are made due to laziness.

American Truck Simulator (as it is, so no New Mexico unless they announce it's free)
-California: 163,695
-Arizona: 113,990
-Nevada: 110,572
=Total: 388,257

Euro Truck Simulator 2 (with no paid DLC)
-Germany: 137,903 (this is including the highway to Denmark)
-United Kingdom: 93,628 (this is including Northern Ireland, but let's just say the difference is the scaling)
-Austria: 32,386 (this is including Graz and Klagenfurt, which are free)
-Netherlands: 16,040
-Switzerland: 15,940
-Belgium: 11,787
-Luxembourg: 999
=Partial Total: 308,683

Which is great, until you realize that we also have several incomplete countries not listed. France is about one-third of its ~213,010sqmi area, so let's count it as "a bit under 80,000, and enough to make up the difference." From there, we also have the vast majority of the Czech Republic, reasonable chunks of Poland and Italy, and a single city from Slovakia.

One thing to consider is that the American area is generally much more detailed and overall better thought-out than the base Euro Truck Simulator 2 map. It is also, however, more sparse. Nevada, Arizona, and eastern California don't actually have very many towns or roadways for their size. Much like the desert, this is simply a fact of life: portraying the area in any other way would be inaccurate. But it doesn't change the fact that it's true. The end result is that no matter how you look at it, the American Truck Simulator map still falls short in a number of ways.

But I think the biggest issue with American Truck Simulator's map relative to ETS2 isn't its size, but rather its shape. The ETS2 base map is a fairly large swath of land around central Europe expanding outward, and you have a lot of travel options for most places that aren't, like, Aberdeen. American Truck Simulator is comparatively rigid, with a base map that has a large corner chunk removed from it (thanks Utah) as well as a large dead-zone in the center (the desert expanse between Truckee, Fresno, Tonopah, Barstow, and Las Vegas.) As a result of this, the map feels even smaller than it is because you're coerced into a relatively low number of options for long-distance travel.

I'm not going to beg for it, but I do feel like the base ATS map could use one more free area before going fully paid. New Mexico is one option, since most people are probably buying it for the link to Texas anyway, but I think Utah is a more sensible choice: it would make the base game's map much smoother, both in terms of its geographical borders and its gameplay contributions. It's also not a very highly-demanded state otherwise, unlike Oregon and soon Texas/Colorado, so it would kinda make sense to have it as an investment to give people access to Colorado and states further to the northeast.

To put it another way, I feel like it would benefit the game substantially if we go down a path like the following: New Mexico and then Texas as paid DLC, so SCS can start making money again. Then release Utah as a freebie investment for the future, so players: no longer have an excuse to complain about the base map, can access current and future areas of the map more easily, and have a viable vanilla attachment for the states of Colorado and Wyoming as well as a non-Jackpot route for theoretical standalone Idaho DLC. After that, go back to making paid maps as is possible, either capitalizing on momentum to do a popular state (like Oregon or Colorado) or treating the free DLC as an excuse to justify taking a brief detour into a less-popular one like Oklahoma or Idaho.

[wolfedg]

@Irirdium I definately agree on Utah. I was even expecting that the developers would likely release it first until the NM announcement.