Now, another interesting question would be: How do you make interesting exploration in isometric or top down view?
If you make maps with explicit borders like in IE or any amount of terrain that is small enough to be combed exhaustively you lose.
If you don't you probably lose too, but at least you may try.
I guess that if you closed maps, you need to make some of the treasures, locations, NPC and so on not completely explicit and force the player to use his own intelligence and the PC skills in a smart way to uncover them. The problem in that case is still how to initiate that discovery. Pixel hunting sucks so we're left with the highlighted interactive spots. Maybe a way to deal with that would to take a note from old adventure games were you need to figure out wich particular action and object works but with some kind of limit to avoid the try-every-single-combination-possible gameplay. What you think?
Hmm I'm trying to think back on all the games I've played so I can play the same note you two are. Ok, yes, I remember Diablo did not automatically outline the items on the ground - that happened in Diablo II. In Diablo I you had to either eyeball it and then move the mouse over somehting to see if it was indeed an item or you just try-every-sinngle-pixel-possible. Most of the time I just eyeballed it because there was no named killed but sometimes I would move the mouse around if there was a named. Generally, I knew where the items were.
Hmm. This discussion is NOT unique. I recall the same discussion in a Thief thread in another forum. Essentially it was about whether something was lost when all items on the screen are glowing? Some posters commented in the original Thief items didn't glow and important items could be buried in a desk. Some said they liked it that way, but it seems most agreed it just led to try-every-single-container-posible and were thankful it was abandoned. The watershed moment was when someone said you could just turn off item glowing. Of course there was a counter argument that newer games are designed for glowing items and so turning off the glowing item feature led to a les than stellar experience versus the older games which were designed around the lack of glowing items.
You know I think this boils down to minimaps, radars, automarkers on maps, glowing paths, linear maps and other such things. I may get flamed for saying it, but I think the crucial element in exploration is NOT being shown where things are and furthermore not being excessively nursed by the game designers with the intention you follow the correct path and hence don't get lost.
Do I like getting lost? Do I like having to look for things? Maybe I do. I think I just feel more immersed when I have to look at my surroundings and have a internal sense of direction. When I have to guess where items might be or evne see them it makes me feel like I
have to pay attention. For whatever reason, I like having to pay attention that way. I like it even more if the designers are intuitive - as in, notes are in desks, not inside shoes. Some intuitiveness is appropriate. Sometimes notes might be in shoes and still be intuitive. When I guess correctly, it feels even more like a reward because -I- did it.
But I'll add sometimes games can have toooooo little intuitiveness and too little playtesting. When I play a game I eexpect it it be well made and not rushed. Just because I like to feel like -I- am doing the exploring, doesn't mean the designer can be lazy and not put thought into things. He/she still has to help me. For example, it's conceivable a real thief might store a note in his shoe and I'd never look there and get frustrated. It's the designers job to ensure: a) I feel challenged by exploring and finding clues b) I have a reasonable chance to find my quarry. They do have to baby me a small amount.