This page is for feedback, comments, and questions on all the UESP Maps.
Deletion of ESO Non-Game Locations
I deleted a number of locations from the ESO map earlier today. These included links to beta subzone maps and various locations for places which do not appear in ESO. I would like to offer some general reasons for why I did this, then some more specifics, and finally make a suggestion which I hope can serve as a substitute for those who may remain dissatisfied.
The reason underlying my choice to remove these locations was that they misrepresent the game. The inherent assumption to the user who is familiar with UESP content is that what is presented is a representation of the games. This is the standard of quality that the UESP wiki gamespaces strive for and what I believe the maps should too strive for. Subzones have been deprecated for many years now, and their beta maps irrelevant for even longer. The locations giving lore-accurate labels to areas of Tamriel which have no representation in ESO are also irrelevant to an ESO player and do not represent the game. In both cases, even, the existence of these locations on the UESP maps supposes relevance, and so conveys an inaccurate representation of the game at no fault of the user.
I play ESO on-and-off, and for many years because of the UESP maps I have assumed that there was simply something I wasn't aware of. I didn't know that the off-style maps were from the beta (the worlds have been labeled as beta only recently) and the Occam's razor assumption that I worked under for many years was that they appeared in some content that I simply did not progress far enough into some questline to encounter in-game. Only now that I know ESO better than ever before have I gained the confidence in my game knowledge to actually conclude that that natural assumption is false. I understand not everybody has the same experiences, but when something is conducive to instilling self-doubt in the user and conveying inaccurate information, that is a clear sign that something needs changing. I initially made the changes without discussion because I believed it to be a straightforward application of UESP tenets and that I believed them to be holdovers from ages past (the latter I now understand to be inaccurate).
I was aware that there were plans to reimplement the beta maps as layers upon the live map counterparts. What I did not know was that this might still be some time away and that the specifics for how it would work for subzones was not solidified (because there were 3 subzones per zone). The beta maps are still accessible via search and can be found within a special "Beta Maps" group of the location list menu, so I believed the state in which I left them to be workable until that happened.
Finally, I am taking this opportunity to reiterate a suggestion I made long ago: to create a lore-specific map. I understand that the primary counterargument to the removal of lore-based locations from the ESO maps is that they're cool and enjoyable. I agree, it's just unfortunate that it's misplaced for a map which seeks to represent and aid the ESO experience and that there is currently no adequate home for that kind of thing. That's why (and for many more reasons too) I strongly suggest a separate lore-based map which can be the home for the like. It could be the kind of thing to really embrace imprecision and leaving no thing excluded, and I think it could be wonderful. -Dcsg (talk) 05:11, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- While I strongly disagree with you making this big a change without soliciting input from the mapping community first, I do agree that there's no harm in removing overt links to the beta material from what is supposed to be a representation of the current in-game map. If people want to see the beta material, it's still there and searchable. And I also love the idea of a lore map! Solomon1972 (talk) 16:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- I personally disagree with the removal. I think the eso-beta map links should stay while we don't have a suitable replacement for them in the gamemap interface, and the "lore region names" should stay, albeit at a high/highest zoom level for those curious. If they're sufficiently out of the way, most players I think will not confuse them with places you can go in game. Thal-J (talk) 21:57, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Alchemist Survey: High Isle - location missing on the map
As written earlier https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online_talk:Alchemist_Survey:_High_Isle the location is missig on the map, hence the link on the page is redirected to the Tamriel world view. --22.214.171.124 10:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- The older version of the map is still available here, (in response to your request on the linked talk page). As for the location, someone would have to add it to the map, the "view on map" link on most pages is auto generated and not necessarily guaranteed to be on the map. Thal-J (talk) 13:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Thal-J! Especially for the link to the older UI-version :) And the explanation about the links. Well, somebody with permission to edit the map will see this some day and spend the hopefully only few minutes to add it. And thanks in advance!--126.96.36.199 19:32, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Searching within zones
The reason I use the maps is for Chests & Surveys within each zone, this has been taken away, or not given adequate reference. Would like to see the search zone for particular items reintroduced in a simplistic manner or give the choice for old versus new.. I would use old. AaronGuilder Thank you, confirmed the old page works. AG
- You can still search within zones:
- Click search
- Click "Search options"
- Check the "Only show results from this map" box.
- You can also do "type:chest" in the search box in addition to the above to only search for chests in the current zone. Thal-J (talk) 13:56, 14 August 2023 (UTC)