Add new comment

I know this is an old post, but I have 2 examples from VG -- 1 to show where the got it wrong, as described, and another where they got it right.

1st, where they got it wrong:

The City of Aghram

I commented to my friend who took this screenie that there should be "lived on or prepared" ground around the city, but as it is, it looks like the city was just plopped down in the virgin wilderness. The desert is completely undisturbed right up to the wall, and yet this is supposedly the capital city of the continent -- well lived in, well used -- yet, the area around the city doesn't reflect this. Where are the outbuildings around the city? The temporary markets and holding pens for commodities/livestock being brought in to be sold and distributed in the city? There's just nothing there.

and 2nd, where they did better:

The port of Khal

The ground outside looks used. There are roads, trees obviously planted by the people there, outbuildings. . . it's not perfect, as some areas (especially to the upper left where it follows the river) aren't quite so "transitioned" but it's much better than the 1st.

I think the original commenter had it exacly right -- there usually aren't the proper transitions. It's like they made a world, popped it in an editor and said "place rock, place fence, place building" and it ends up being like they were just dropped from the sky as a result.