Did repeating titles (more limited title set) contribute to maps

>>33399280
no run/bike was shit

>>33399280
I think it's a kid's imagination thing primarily, but no running and no need to pack every area full of NPCs that give out the obligatory items or carry out the expected game functions does help in making it feel a bit less claustrophobic.

I'm playing the early games right now, and in some ways it feels bigger because of what I described above, but it does also feel smaller than I remember it because I know the layout and have the mental faculties to keep how to get everywhere in mind. Cerulean/Vermillion/Saffron/Celadon/Lavender are all a stone's throw away from one another, and none of the routes up to this point are exactly winding, they usually don't require any thought or HMs to navigate comprehensively, and they're also pretty sparse on pushing you through mandatory tall grass patches, instead relying on trainer density to pad out routes.

Encounters are the number one thing making the routes seem longer than they are, be it outdoor routes packed with trainer fights the first time through (or persistently, if you avoid some on your initial trek), or the high encounter rate in caves.

There are also a few places where there's just a lot of empty space though. There are some routes, cities, and caves where if you stand in the right spot, you're just standing in a total void of repeating floor tiles and can't see any walls or structures around you. Maybe an NPC will be onscreen with you.

File: 2enq6qf.jpg (110KB, 800x598px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 800x598px

>>33399481
>There are also a few places where there's just a lot of empty space though. There are some routes, cities, and caves where if you stand in the right spot, you're just standing in a total void of repeating floor tiles and can't see any walls or structures around you. Maybe an NPC will be onscreen with you.

That was the thing I was wondering about the most, because I was comparing the games with their remakes desu.

Like Idk, additional titles make the zones optically smaller even if they're actually slightly bigger in some places (few titles?) and much easier to mentally map compared to huge areas consisting of repeating blocks.

>>33399574
Did the remakes zoom out your view any? That would obviously go a long way, even if it was just an extra tile or two in each direction. I've never compared them in that way before.

>>33399574
TILES. THEY'RE FUCKING TILES. NOT TITLES.

None of the remakes felt smaller to me.

File: 1405260883423.png (173KB, 725x800px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 725x800px

>>33399658
>TILES. THEY'RE FUCKING TILES. NOT TITLES.
I'm writing my 250 word essay for tomorrows university class. I'm tired, sorry.

>>33399634
>Did the remakes zoom out your view any?
That's something interesting to check. GBAs screen was wider than the original GB/GBC screen.

Well, it would explain why people think Hoenn's ocean is larger than it actually is. I've seen people say Hoenn is generally small which is wrong. I don't get how varied tilesets make things seem smaller? I don't feel that at all.

>>33399753
I noticed that old games with less going on on maps (read smaller tilesets with less small garbage like additional textures to floors, flowers, trash, etc etc) feel bigger than modern games that are sort of bigger but have bigger visual variance. Just like Hoenn's ocean or Celadon city that has 1-2 screens of just pavement in them and 2 long "secret" routes between trees.

I sort of want to check if others feel that this theory is true.