NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »Didn't you and someone else already make this addon?
I don't see the point in having a map in ESO that doesn't follow ESO lore, but isn't the real point about addons that you can both create addons that cover both options? It's not an "either/or" situation.
In any event, I don't have any problems with the present map and although on PC don't use addons anyway, so it's academic to me although I do wonder why both options aren't implemented for those who want them.
I don't see the point in having a map in ESO that doesn't follow ESO lore, but isn't the real point about addons that you can both create addons that cover both options? It's not an "either/or" situation.
In any event, I don't have any problems with the present map and although on PC don't use addons anyway, so it's academic to me although I do wonder why both options aren't implemented for those who want them.
It's very technically difficult to implement a toggle, and it would make the map much harder to develop when neither of us have the time already to manage a single map file.
It's just not a tenable proposition to add that sort of functionality.
And in any case, it comes off as bitter and resentful, and frankly a little elitist to suggest that ESO is less than canon because it changed the locations of a few places like Balfiera, Arenthia, and Stormhold.
Prophet_of_Malacath wrote: »My take on the maps is simple - we don't have any space-age satellites taking pictures, lol.
Maps change over time because they're well-researched but imperfect.
Even IRL, countries bicker over borders & histories, "each side" arguing over who founded what & who is really the outsider.
Moreover, maps change with time. Islands erupt from sea volcanoes. Lakes dry up. Now add a world with gods & it happens faster - Mehrunes Dagon literally ripped parts of Mournhold, and Molag Bal has littered Coldharbour with chunks he took.
As for the 3 locations:
Quibbling over BALFIERA seems silly - everything from TES2 has moved around. In fact, if comparative magic is any indication, the later ages are fallen ages in terms of scholarship. Spells get worst, crafting styles more basic, in ESO a Sorcerer can have around 7 daedra yet by TES5 it's considered "a feat of excellence" to summon 2 at a time. I'd take ESO's omniscient map & consider TES2 "the best a ship-stranded Imperial spy stuck in a cave could put together using local sources".
ARENTHIA also seems fine. Reaper's March isn't entirely in any province - we even see the river down the center where it should split. In old maps, Valenwood always had a gentle ( shape to the east - and indeed, on Arenthia's side of Reaper's March, we see bosmer communities (including growing new trees inside old Imperial ruins). The ESO map is accurate because the forest has not grown out that far yet.
STORMHOLD I know is part of multiple concerns - since there's also Deshaan, Dres territory & the location of Narsis (which in other maps was much further south). One solution is that in the border-mountain between Deshaan & Black Marsh, there might be unexplored territory we've skipped. Alternatively, a later disaster deepens the river (into Stonefalls), Narsis is wrought by a natural/magical disasters, nu-Narsis builds south (to match other maps). Point is we have a thousand years or so for the map to evolve - in a setting where in half-a-decade we've had walking Daedric Princes, dragons, vampire armies, name it.
Good luck to you both. But really, I wouldn't measure the 2E map by 3E or 4E norms.
NotaDaedraWorshipper wrote: »Didn't you and someone else already make this addon?
We did, yes, but we've cone into this particular disagreement that the poll is trying to assess.
I believe we should follow ESO's lore, the other person does not think we should follow ESO's lore and that the map should reflect lore from the rest of the series, and not for the actual game the addon is being made for.