By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Wyrdness said:
sc94597 said:

They never mention how they approximated the 1 sq-km per square. Seems like an assumption to me. 

I think it is better to go off what Nintendo has said (twelve times TP) , especially since it has matched all analyses of the map that use different methodology (besides this one.) If they described how they estimated I could comment on whether it was a good estimation or not. Also, it doesn't seem like you could fit 120 of the demo areas into the map, which would be the implication with their area estimates. 

You yourself made assumptions in your calculations, Nintendo also originally said XCX was 5 times larger than the original and it turned out to be far bigger, they tend to give conservative estimates.

All estimations will have assumptions. My point is that they never mentioned theirs, so we can't tell how valid their assumptions are and approximate an uncertainty. Takahashi said XCX was "more than" 5 times larger than the original: > is not the same as =. The land-area of Xenoblade Chronicles X ended up only being slightly bigger than that 5 times anyway. I doubt Nintendo would say that this game is 12 times larger than TP when it is in fact 100 times larger. If each block was 1 sq-km, then it would be quite easy for Nintendo to come up with a specific number like 100 times rather than 12 times larger. Unless they were overestimating TP? But per Occam's Razor, I think the simplest solution is usually the correct one.