Movement and Space (in CRPGs)

I think the reason I'm having such a hard time quantifying difficulty in RPGs is because the problem is essentially the same as the problem of what makes games difficult in general. Action games have the easy way out of adjusting time, because they're essentially just challenging your reflexes. So I'm going to put the question aside for now, and concentrate on the issue of movement and the need for spatial reasoning.

As a disclaimer, let me say that I'm one of those people who gets lost easily. I can get completely turned around in game environments that are not presented in a top-down view (I also have trouble telling the cardinal directions in real life), and I sometimes have trouble distinguishing my game avatar from the background or from other moving objects. (This is one reason why I don't play Super Smash Brothers Melee.)

I think that most CRPGs require too much navigation. Most CRPGs have vast, sprawling "world maps" that you have to plod through to get to the interesting parts - the dungeons and cities. Some games don't have world maps, but require you to trudge through screen after screen of encounters in order to get from point A to point B. Although the encounters might be interesting the first few times through, they quickly grow tedious and get in the way of the real meat of the game. (Some people might argue that random encounters are the real meat of the game. I think they could be, if handled well, but at the moment, random encounters are usually just filler to make the game take more time.) I'm especially annoyed when, after finishing a dungeon in a game, I have to trek back up through all of its levels to get back to town.

I know that there are reasons for all this movement. In a way it's more realistic, or at least adds to the sense of adventure. It's more rewarding to notice a secret entrance yourself than to have the game notify you when you succeed at your random chance to notice it. Movement through the world also lets the programmers show off their neat graphics routines, and the artists get to show off the world they've built. By now, such movement is an expectation of the genre. Legend of Dragoon featured a world map where you could only travel on routes between important locations, and gamers complained that the designers had "dumbed down" the world map.

I think that the concept of discrete nodes with paths between them is sound, but my ideal world map is more complicated than Legend of Dragoon's. One of the features I like about tabletop gaming is that movement is abstracted. This is a phenomenon that also shows up in books. When someone travels for four days from one city to another, only the interesting events are described. If nothing happens, then the book might skip a line and start the next paragraph with "On arriving in the city of..." The GM of the RPG might do something similar, saying "Now you're in _____. What do you do?"
In essence, I want a world map that consists of discrete nodes with paths between them, but where travelling along the paths can trigger encounters. But I don't just want the world map to work like this; everything should work like this. Within cities, the important locations are the shops and the places you can get quests. Dungeons are a little more complicated. In a way, every room could be considered an "important point". However, not all rooms are actually interesting. One node for each puzzle, for the boss (and one each for any mini-bosses), and for branches where both sides lead to nodes (i.e. branches where one side leads to a dead end should not have nodes) should be enough. What's the difference between this layout and normal dungeons? One is that, ideally, there will be few or no random encounters between nodes. Another is that movement between nodes should take place more quickly than movement through the equivalent corridors of a "normal" dungeon. Yet another is that the nodes and path will essentially act as a "zoomed-out" display of the dungeon, which should keep people from getting lost.

The main problem with this scheme is that for the game to be entertaining, all of the interesting encounters have to actually be, well, interesting. It's a "quality versus quantity" trade-off. Most CRPGs rely on frequent, not-very-interesting encounters to drive the gameplay. This is combined with a rather tedious "puzzle" in the form of movement and navigation. The result is a game that takes a long time but has few interesting points. I would be perfectly happy to play a shorter game where every encounter was interesting. (If someone can recommend one to me that is not extremely three-dimensional, it would be much appreciated. I can't think of any off the top of my head.) I suppose it's just my short attention span. ;)