ProMods

loupdargent wrote: ↑

15 Nov 2017 02:56

Yeah, i think that states in the Midwest are the less expected, because it's mainly flat grasslands and fields.

But this makes me think that the development here would be faster (and perhaps more work focused on the cities there), and a not so long wait to reach the east, which is more forested and mountainous

The Appalachian Range is very low in elevation, they are more like hills compared to the Western US, I struggle to call it a proper mountain range. I'll agree somewhat with forested, though most of the forests have been clear cut and made into farmland over the centuries, The forests tend to be more sporadic outside of New England and the Appalachian Range the good news is that forest is fairly deciduous which is a good change of pace for forests in the game which is highly dominated by conifers at present. Florida itself has its own unique ecosystem and forests due to the tropical weather and unique soil composition.

n4gix.bill.leaming wrote: ↑

14 Nov 2017 18:36

Texas is just miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles...

I suppose for the areas North of Huston this probably is the best description of the environment, mostly grasslands for what seems an eternity. Though El Paso has some desert area and mountains nearby they are probably too out of the way to be included in the game, As you approach Huston though the scene takes a tropical turn so its not all hopeless that something emerges among all the cowboy/dude ranches out that way.

Mercedes2002CZ wrote: ↑

14 Nov 2017 21:34

And what about middle states like Kansas, Misouri, Nebraska etc.

What about it? just endless expanse of wheat, corn and sometimes barley, The badlands might count as something different though the rest of the area is just farms and prairie forever.

If SCS has shown us something until now is that they make "boring" areas (desert) fun. So I think that will do the same when they reach the Plains. But that's still far away.

I don't know about deserts being 'boring'. I figure most people just can't appreciate it due to say it being too hot or they only see dirt and rocks outside their window. oh well I suppose the desert isn't for everyone though its far more exciting that endless plains of flat grassland. Its going to be a certain kind of challenge to make that exciting to drive through.

Volleybal4life wrote: ↑

14 Nov 2017 20:12

Yeah, for what I've seen about Texas on TV (I know, that's not really the real thing) I think Texas shouldn't even be a DLC on it's own, but together with a neighboring state.

My bet is...
Texas bundled together with Oklahoma. If Texas is in a bundle.

Callipso wrote: ↑

16 Nov 2017 04:06

I don't know about deserts being 'boring'. I figure most people just can't appreciate it due to say it being too hot or they only see dirt and rocks outside their window. oh well I suppose the desert isn't for everyone though its far more exciting that endless plains of flat grassland. Its going to be a certain kind of challenge to make that exciting to drive through.

I've traveled IRL in Cali, Arizona, Utah, Nevada and i can humbly say that the deserts are beautiful.
Especially with big rock/mountain formations, the sun will make it so magical.
Especially during sunset and dawn

I voted for Oregon. Like someone said, we need some green areas not after all the desert.
It's better for us to be able to go up and down through states than just having to go east all the time.

I think that next steps will be 1) Utah + Colorado, 2) Texas, 3) Oregon, 4) Idaho and 5) Oklahoma + Kansas combo

Mercedes2002CZ wrote: ↑

14 Nov 2017 21:34

n4gix.bill.leaming wrote: ↑

14 Nov 2017 18:36

Texas is just miles and miles of nothing but miles and miles...

And what about middle states like Kansas, Misouri, Nebraska etc.

More miles and miles! Seriously, these are frequently referred to as "Fly Over States" for a reason...

One of the first things I learned when I first moved to Kingsville, Texas was (a) always carry five gallons of gas and (b) if travelling to the next town, pack a bag lunch to eat along the way.

I voted for Utah, but only because it is beside of Colorado. I would love to "drive" from LA to Denver through the Rockies. Steep roads and many trees. You know what i mean. And my "dreamtour" will be LA to Chicago either on a Promod map or SCS map. I am also excited to see what they will do with the south ( Alabama , Louisiana , Georgia and so on ) . How they manage to cope with climate difference from the Rockies and CA.

About the New Mexico DLC, I had a "Trip" through some serpentine roads, and it made me think of an old movie made by Spielberg in the early70ties. In Danish : duellen. It is with "Mcloud" driving a car trying to pass a tanker, but each time he tries to pass, the tanker would not let him. I guess that some of you on my age ( 50 years ) have seen the film on TV.

Have a nice weekend

HenryJensen wrote: ↑

18 Nov 2017 21:19

I voted for Utah, but only because it is beside of Colorado. I would love to "drive" from LA to Denver through the Rockies. Steep roads and many trees. You know what i mean. And my "dreamtour" will be LA to Chicago either on a Promod map or SCS map. I am also excited to see what they will do with the south ( Alabama , Louisiana , Georgia and so on ) . How they manage to cope with climate difference from the Rockies and CA.

About the New Mexico DLC, I had a "Trip" through some serpentine roads, and it made me think of an old movie made by Spielberg in the early70ties. In Danish : duellen. It is with "Mcloud" driving a car trying to pass a tanker, but each time he tries to pass, the tanker would not let him. I guess that some of you on my age ( 50 years ) have seen the film on TV.

Have a nice weekend

Yes! You're absolutely right! That's why I want Colorado after Oregon. I really love to drive on I-70 through the rocky mountains.