Hi!
I would like to know why this game is getting map revamps. What were the reasons to start doing this?
Do you have an estimation as to when the revamp will be finished?
(I’m asking because I don’t really like it when the game I play are constantly shifting, but that’s not my point…)
EDIT: It seems revamps were part of the plan all along: DLC | Generation Zero. It kinda answered my question, honestly.
I am guessing it’s to show that time has passed, and to flesh out empty areas by attempting to make the world a bit more interesting to explore. (Less copypasted houses for example) There’s also the performance aspect, seeing what can be done to make the game easier to run.
No idea when the revamps will be done though. They’ve done so much work already, wouldn’t surprise me if they want to do the whole island.
What does it mean? “Passed” since when? Is this game like Fortnite or Apex, with an evolving story?
As it says in the trailer of Alpine Unrest, a month has passed since the Machines invaded. We’re way past that now, so the revamps are there to show that the world and the story evolves.
There are plenty of indicators ingame to tell the player that time has passed, and explain what’s been going on around the island. Like that huge crater in the Farmlands, and where that came from.
Daaaammmn… That’s exactly the kind of things I dislike…
It seems to me like they have to come up with a narrative explanation each time they decide to revamp an area. Like… The revamp comes first, then some kind of narrative justification. (That’s just an assumption. I might be wrong.)
“No Man’s Sky” had the same kind of revamp in 2017, and now Day One buyers cannot play the original version of the game anymore. Also, analysing the story throughout the years reveals that it has not developed like the chapters of a book, but it has been reworked, like for a reboot or a remake. 
I feel like that’s what happened and keep happening with “Generation Zero” too.
Yeah it is kind of annoying that the maps change… but the maps felt empty before so i cant reallly complain. What i do not like however is that its piece by piece… and many tearing problems still remain unadressed.
It’s one of those “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation, I guess. 
While I wait for an official answer, I might search for an old blog entry or something…
In a way I kinda like that the map sort of evolves, but the problem is for player that start the game for the first time. It would be better If it was possible that the regions change after certain conditions have been meet, with location and set pieces that get’s added into the world as you progress through the story.
For example: Alpine Unrest won’t be available until you’ve progressed through some of the story (let’s say the finished the main quests in the Archipelago Region),
and FNIX Rising will only be available after you finish the base game’s main storyline.
What about the crater in the farmlands, should that be available from day the player wakes up near Yttervik?
This would however bring other problems, like playing with someone that has progressed further than you.
Not to mention the issue with file size, you would have to store at best 2 maps different maps.
Note to add:
I would love to see the game world change as you progress, since a miss that untouched, mysterious landscape where the people that lived there have seemingly vanished into thin air. when new players starts now it’s pretty clear from the get go that the machines attacked the people.
But this also brings up another issue, Should the devs have to make two layouts? One for when it recently happened and one for many months later?
I don’t think there are good solutions to any of these issues. either you have to sacrifice performance and file size or immersion for new players.
Revamping existing areas in all honour but there are still three sizeable islands to develop the story on. Not to mention (dare I say it) the mainland.
Another small point here but if time passes and the regions evolve, we should probably start to see some deterioration of campsite tents and maybe more property destruction. Especially if Soviet machines have started fighting FNIX machines.
I do suggest keeping the Archipelago, southern end of Mountains and southern end of Farmlands regions as close to the early days as possible for the sake of new players wanting the storyline to make sense. If the mission system can actively guide players to explore those areas first before moving into higher and higher level areas then the feeling of progression can be maintained to a degree throughout the storyline. This would require the development team revamp the mission system a bit though.
In a mixed progression multiplayer environment I can’t think of any other way of achieving the gradual progression feel.
Well… I see your point but, arguably, the tents could have been set up mere days ago by other survivors and could, theoretically, still be in use by characters that you can’t see.
That’s what we seeing with destroyed / burning houses
Yes there is, and there are many that would like to see those indeed.
As for the mainland, perhaps we get to see that in a sequel? or at least get some information from, like how it is in Göteborg and Stockholm.
This will be like with Himfjäll… DLC-only content.
I don’t mind DLC. I don’t mind paying the developers for creating more content at all.
Me neither. I prefer paid DLC so I can vote with my money.
With paid DLCs, people who don’t pay for the DLC know that they are not paying for things they don’t want.
With free DLCs, I always wonder if developers used the money I gave them to develop something that doesn’t fit my play style…
The new DLC is a good example: I don’t play base-defense games, so I feel comfortable not buying it, and I hope that the new revenues will help Systemic Reaction develop base-building if needed, while leaving the existing capital for the core gameplay mechanics that were already there on Day 1. (You know… For polishing/QA/QoL/UX.)
I do not see the reasoning behind this.
Thr money you spent buying the game is for the game. You gave them your money to play the game.
Whether the next dlc is paid or not is irrelevant to the money you or others gave when first buying it. Your money still went into developing that. Just now, you have to pay again to use it.
This is especially a problem when the content being expanded on is extremely bare bones.
I am not against payed dlc. But that’s when it is actually extra/excessive. And to a point, neither of those words apply to the newest build dlc since none of those items were in the game in any form except the turret.
You’re right. I just read that section:
https://generationzero.com/en/more
Let’s go back on the topic of the revamp. Well… In fact, that hyperlink also mentions revamping… Funnily, the title of the page is “DLC”.
I’m a bit surprised that they did not plan for some kind of “time-machine” feature for people to go back to a previous state of the map, considering that they already knew that the map would “grow and evolve”. 
maybe in future you’re able to use the delorean which is hidden…
in the mountain region.
In part, devs do things like this for retention. To change things to have players coming back.
Another aspect is that this is a (very impressive) low-budget game. Devs didn’t have the opportunity to flesh the game out to their full vision prior to release. So many of the changes are likely what they had in mind from the start.
Pretty much the assumption I’ve made in several posts. Which makes the suggestion thread all the more important. I just wish more people took the time to pop in and come up with constructive suggestions.
Also Zesiir is doing a great job answering everything. I just wish the dev team could pop in for a bit of feedback in the suggestions forum. Perhaps to just say doable or not to some common suggestions.
Let’s not forget devs are in Sweden though. Right now, it’s 1:45AM.