User talk:Ee/Interactive Map trial

I have currently linked the zone maps of Lion's Arch and Hoelbrak onto the zone pages in their (almost) original size because there are so many npcs. Would it be better to have the thumbs maps link through to the interactive npc map? This is a slooooooow job, it'll take some time btw. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Ee (talk).

Also, after the graphical redesign of the wikistyle is done, this template will need some redesigning adaptations too, i've simply copied the templates from gw1 now. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Ee (talk).

If Semantic MediaWiki ends up getting installed, it has an extension Semantic Maps that makes it super-easy to create interactive annotated maps. It'll take a bit of work to create a map layer for Tyria, tiled at various zoom levels, as a custom layer, but it would be worth the effort. —Dr Ishmael 12:27, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Zomg. I didn't know that even existed, shows how good i am at googling. Want. Who can i bribe? --Ee 13:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Bribing isn't required; it's been so well received, it'll be introduced. :P - Infinite - talk 13:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Full map

Does anyone have (or know of) a fully-uncovered world map? I haven't unpacked the .dat yet (mostly because I know I will lose days of my life digging through it), but in GW1 the map was stored tiled into 512x512 textures. If the same thing is available for GW2, that would be awesome. —Dr Ishmael 14:23, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Whilst we are not allowed to have an official map published, it does exist. I don't feel it's proper practise of the official wiki to use the full map found in the .dat file without specific permissions from ArenaNet. There is still a fine line between taking the liberty to be official and actually breaking the rules to document information. - Infinite - talk 15:01, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Until then, I have a 100% (I think) beta map in my screens from the BWE - I just have to copy/paste them together. Konig/talk 16:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Do we know if there's a way to see x, y coordinates in-game? --Ee 06:24, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

There is not as far as I saw. Konig/talk 09:33, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

meanwhile there's a full world map up here.--Ee 06:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Usefulness of interactive maps

I do not believe there is a need for interactive maps on this wiki. There are so few things that I feel could be used on an interactive map due to the constantly changing nature of GW2's explorables. Cities are less of an issue, but equally lackluster. To explain:

• Points of Interest: There are so few per location (either on the level of Queensdale or Village of Shaemoor) that there's little point - it's viable, but not really a reason to have such.
• Hearts: These are definitely worthwhile, but only on the locational level of a "zone" (e.g., Queensdale).
• NPCs: In explorable zones, they change too much due to dynamic events (sans heart NPCs). Those that do not change and are stationary are too few or unimportant. You currently list regular NPCs which would furthermore get far too cluttered - in your example there are about 5 NPCs of equal importance to the two you listed within Commodore's Manor (including the commodore himself), they are from a bird's eye view (aka from a map) right on top of each other - how do you fix that? If you list only vendors, that's more feasible, but again a lot change based on dynamic events, or are placed right on top of each other as Anet often groups them together.
• Bosses: Veterans and Champions do not hold as much value as bosses in GW1, so there's no point in listing them. The only ones that do hold value belong to dungeons or dynamic events - the former holds little benefit to an interactive map while the latter moves far too much to be usable on an interactive map.
• Events: Like above, they move around far too often - furthermore, there are far too many events focused in the same areas. Not feasible to be done on a map when trying to share them all.
• Meta events: Unlike normal events, they don't overlap (those within them do though), but there's little need for an interactive map - a paintjob (preferably well done mind you) over the affected areas and placing that in the specific meta event's article would be far better than an interactive map.

So again, I don't think that interactive maps will be feasible for GW2, unlike with GW. Konig/talk 16:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Listing every single npc in the game would be madness o.O. - but people do like to find vendors, crafters and banks in cities or villages. Also, if a map is set up properly you can choose to show just karma vendors, or just the crafters, or just skill points - or nothing at all if it bothers you. --Ee 20:35, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Instead of interactive maps, I'd support one big interactive map. I assume we could link to specific coordinates to link to from zone articles, etc.? - Infinite - talk 20:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

@Ee: My point remains that often vendors and the like will often overlap or move/disappear dependent on the state of the zone. And if we were to divide it so specifically as to go "Karma vendor" "armorsmith" etc. etc., that'd be as hard as linking every NPC! It'd be far easier on both the read and the editor to simply have it as traditional lists.

@Infinite: Depends on how big is "one big interactive map" - if you mean the whole continent of Tyria, I do not think that wiki has the capability for such (and would require either a lot of scrolling or a big monitor) - same with regions (e.g., Kryta) to be honest. If going by zones (e.g., Queensdale), less so but still the issues I bring up remain. As to coordinates - only when you add in something to act as the link (dead space cannot be a link, and no not the game).

A new issue I forgot is map icons (ty for reminding me Infinite) - in GW1, you can ctrl shift h and all icons are cleared making a nice clean map. But with GW2, the map remains the same and what disappears are the UI in the top left and bottom right corners - thus you still have a cluttered map, and creating interactive maps work best on clean maps. As it is, we'll have to perfectly aline each map icon with a new icon or simply have the link be via a name which, once more, clutters a lot for things like venders. And furthermore, without removing those icons, even if you were to set it so certain things show... they'll still be on the map, just nameless and linkless.

tl;dr - it works for GW1, it doesn't work for GW2. If you can prove me wrong, do so, but until I see it work in userspace, I'll be standing by "it's going to be too complex with things as they are" - at least, too complex with wiki coding (unless you're some sort of coding wizard, perhaps). Konig/talk 21:27, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

It has been suggested a gigantic interactive map of the whole continent will be perfect possible with a software upgrade that has been queued (it would work à la Google Maps). I agree that we'd have to see if it's possible to begin with, though. - Infinite - talk 21:32, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) There's no harm in noting an NPC's "normal" location, even when they can disappear due to events. If the village is currently overrun by centaurs, then of course the NPC won't be there! But you know that if you run the centaurs out, they will reappear. (I didn't think about this during the BWE, but do the little yellow dots on the in-game map disappear in that situation?)

Semantic Maps uses a fully featured map service like Google Maps, there's no limitation due to the wiki's "capability." You would pan and zoom just like on maps.google.com, no need for scrolling.

I'm sure it's possible to use TexMod to replace the in-game icons (and text annotations) with transparent textures in order to get a clean map.

tl;dr This won't be static like GW1W's maps, just wait and see. —Dr Ishmael 21:37, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Let me give an example of what I mean by disappearing NPCs - there are multiple caravan events where when completed for ~10 minutes will remain at the end destination and sell things. In other cases, the completion of certain events must occur - for example in Wayfarer Foothills there is a grawl cave in the southeast corner and there is a 3-step event which can turn them allies for a time, when this is done there will be a grawl merchant selling recipies. 80% of the time these NPCs are not there and are placed near NPCs who are always there (merchant or not). In short, their "normal" location is either non-existent or not as a merchant.

I do believe the dots disappear, as I don't recall seeing even the armor repair icon on the map when an outpost was overrun with Sons of Svanir in Wayfarer, but there was one when it was normal.

If zooming is possible, then a whole-continent interactive map is more feasible. I'm not a programmer or wiki expert so didn't know there's wiki coding that could do it which simply isn't on this wiki. But nonetheless, I'd like to see it done, and without annoyance or confusing aspects (especially confusing) first. But I bet the z-axis addition will make things fairly hard, if not events too. Konig/talk 01:28, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

(Reset indent) The Elder Scrolls Project has a map similar to what Infinite is suggesting running on their wiki. So it is possible, though I'm not sure how one would code it. (Perhaps with MW:Maps). EDIT:Also, we could potentially make toggles that say which events are going on and which aren't and various states (i.e if in event X is going on, then this guy is unavailable; it's information that we would have anyway, so why not include it in the map)... Aqua (T|C) 02:24, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

That is exactly what this would be, except it would be a Google Maps or OpenLayers iframe embedded on a wiki article, and the placemarks would be dynamically generated by SMW based on data stored on the individual PoI/NPC pages.

Events run separately on every server, so trying to display them as they are happening would be extremely confusing. —Dr Ishmael 04:09, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

The map doesn't stand on its own - there's an entire wiki behind it, and each npc has a page where things like how he/she won't be available at such location when this or that event is in such stage should be feasible. The wiki will be an eternal labor anyway, since there will be new events thrown around everywhere all the time with every patch. We'll never reach completion, but Google won't either. The wiki as a dynamic event, ha. --Ee 06:08, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I forgot to mention how happy people would be with interactive gathering maps as well.--Ee 06:22, 4 May 2012 (UTC)