When is the Ragnarok Map Book going to be accurate?

[Vas]

Ok, so why are we still using this crummy inaccurate map in game when the Wiki has a fully detailed great looking accurate map? The desert just looks like a blob of greyed out sand like it always has, even back before the Desert was actually open and build-able.

Just look at that, its horrible. You can't tell where jack squat is in the desert. In fact the map is so wrong its not even funny.

Now here's a great looking map. Except for some reason the blurry areas.

https://ark.gamepedia.com/File:Ragnarok_Topographic_Map.jpg

Right there on the Ark official wiki. Please. For the love of god. Update your map. The desert is totally useless, I can't tell where I am in it based on the fact that its all one big blurred out sand cluster on this map and its totally inaccurate because there's plenty of land marks in the real map that would end up painted on a map book. And the fact that there's two rivers not one.

-------

EDIT: 11/7/2020

Full In Game Map:

Actual Map:

Combination:

 

[Fresiki]

I disagree. I feel the inaccurate map is closer to something you would manage to draw up by yourself if you were an actual survivor. To me it adds an element of immersion to have to rely on a very crude and inaccurate nap, forcing me to pay more attention to landmarks and the terrain. 

 

The "better" map you referenced looks more akin to a satellite image to me. I actually think it would look out of place in-game, kind of like being able to turn off textures and only seeing polygons, and would force a playstyle that involves constantly flying around with your map out and orienting yourself using that, instead of the actual scenery. I don't like it. 

[Egdod]

OK Freski, then please explain why your immersive map drawing abilities are pretty good  north of latitude 50 and west of longitude 40, but in the lower southeast quadrant you just gave up and made it all a mushy blurry mess?  I agree that a high-res map is not immersive, but the OP has a good point.  The map looks like crap in the desert but is fine everywhere else.  That's not immersive, it's lazy or unfinished, or both.  Immersion isn't an excuse to not finish a job.

[Vas]

On 12/27/2020 at 2:41 PM, Egdod said:

OK Freski, then please explain why your immersive map drawing abilities are pretty good  north of latitude 50 and west of longitude 40, but in the lower southeast quadrant you just gave up and made it all a mushy blurry mess?  I agree that a high-res map is not immersive, but the OP has a good point.  The map looks like crap in the desert but is fine everywhere else.  That's not immersive, it's lazy or unfinished, or both.  Immersion isn't an excuse to not finish a job.

This is exactly right. The rest of the map, was well done. This last bit, is just what the map was before desert was released. After the map became official DLC, it got rapidly "finished" then ended. Instantly, forever. Thats what I feel like happened. A rush job to get away from it finally. Tons of unfinished aspects in the map, lots of broken areas that will never ever be seen to. The map book is proof of that.

One of the links broke because of the wiki change too.