With it's current population, VG can afford to have non-instanced dungeons, and not have all the drama and angst that was part of LGuk, Karnors, Sebilis, et all.
I prefer instanced dungeons, personally. I just don't find any enjoyment in dealing with groups camping various parts of the dungeon. Particularly when it's some level 50 farming gear for his twink. Or a gaggle of gold farmers.
The griefer types that got there yayas by train wave after wave of mobs in the dungeon. Or just regular people that figure if they're gonna die, they're gonna take as many other people with them as possible. Regardless of their reasoning for having non-instanced dungeons, I really don't know why they didn't learn their lesson with trains...
All in all, the problems inherent with open dungeons just don't outweigh the benefits for me.
Non-instancing in Vanguard is GOOD - if for no other reason than it gives the MMO genre some variety.
Not everyone is going to like the same things, so I think it's good that there are some games that do things a lot differently than other games. This thread is a good example of what each of us like and don't like.
There are already plenty of MMO games out there that do instancing, so what does it hurt for this one game - Vanguard to do it differently, with non-instancing?
It's o.k. for us all to not like the same games, really it is. It gives us as gamers a lot more variety and more choices. More variety and more choices will ultimately bring in even more gamers. On the other hand, if all the games used the same formula for their design process, it becomes a stagnant genre and there will be a lot less gamers overall in the long run.
Call it a niche game, call it limiting your market potential, that's fine. Anything that gives us more variety in the end is a good thing. I'm perfectly fine with Vanguard being a smallish type MMO along the lines of EQ, EQ2, EvE, CoH, or DAoC.
good post.
Personally I favour instancing because the less instancing there has been in a game the more I have liked the community (compare Ryzom community to GuildWars community - I realise more than just instancing affecst this but it certainly plays a part).
I play a Massively Multiplayer game to see plenty of people around in the world, not just in a glorified chat room (town). I'm playing with a regular complete group, in an instanced game I would have met no1 else, in an uninstanced world I keep bumping into the same folks a few levels on in another dungeon or area, it's great on the whole and an opportunity to chat in tells, give a drive by buff or wave etc - it adds something valuable to the experience for me.
I find that feeling part of a world is a far more interesting upside than the downside of anyone interfering with my acquiring shiny pixels.
To me....instancing is bad. It reminds me that I am playing a video game...which...in an environment designed to draw one into it's world....is bad. If I wanted to just play a video game many xbox and ps3 games would do much better. Instancing is more co-op than mmorpg. Competition with massive amounts of other players is PART of the game. I think this poster got his butt kicked alot in game.
So..You are not reminded that you are playing a video game when another group comes along and asks you if you are here for this specific boss, and if they are then you have to stand in "line" and wait for it to RESPAWN ?
C'on..The whole thing with respawn is as unrealistic as it gets, with instacing atleast you get the feel of winning, actually winning..In a non instanced game all things remain the same at all times..after you killed the boss the dungeon isnt cleared and all teh enemies is back again..
What it does bring is a more hectic game play, but it sure do tell me it's a video game..
/thark
Their is no waiting to kill a boss mob....least....I have yet to have to wait on one to spawn.
Of course those and many other things all remind one that they are playing a video game...BUT...few are as intrusive as the loading of an instance.
Seeing other players running around ...sometimes helping ya..sometimes getting in your way bring the mmo into mmorpg...instancing is more of a co-op situation. If I wanted that...I'd play my xbox instead.
On the contrary, having no instances is way better then having them like Guild wars. Having instances curtails many things done in the game. As far as the npc's, they spawn back really fast, too fast many times so you really don't have to wait around to long for them if someone else takes them out.
No offence, but people need to stop refering to Guild Wars to prove their points about instancing. Not only is GW NOT AN MMO, it's also purely instanced. No one is saying that Vanguard should be nothing but instances. I haven't even seen anyone yet say that they'd want to spend every gaming moment in an instance.
It's all about moderation. A few instances for a few dungeons, so they can offer a better variety of gameplay. What do instances offer? Complex scenarios, for one. A non instanced dungeon more or less involves killing trashj mobs and killing bosses. An instances can offer escorts, deformable environments, rituals and puzzles, unique mob challenges, and maybe even an interactive story. Second, it makes it so you don't have to be griefed by others, intentionally or unintentionally. Nothing like getting wiped by someone else's aggro, or having to wait in line for a boss. Finally, instances can be geared for a specific group size, making it more challenging. Without instances, all you need to do is gather more players to gank whatever boss you're after as soon as it spawns.
I also don't buy the "it's not massively multiplayer" arguement. As I said, it's all about variety. The people here in favor of instances just want them for occasional purposes. And besides, there is so much more to Massively Multiplayer than seeing other people at all times. There's trading, resource gathering, grouping for quests, socializing. And to be honest, after spending an entire week dealing with people saying idiotic crap in chat, people running up and stealing your kills, people begging for gold, people jumping around you like maniacal jackrabbits... it's nice to just gather a few of you closest friends or guildmates, and spend an hour or two performing a quest that's intended just for your group.
As I said earier in the thread, WoW is both an excellent example of how to do instancing, and a bad one. For the first part of the game, instances are something you do every now and then. Not all the time. There are plenty of persistant options, far more than there are instances. It's only after the endgame bait-and-switch that instancing is given a bad name. Endgame, all relevant content in in instances. And that isn't right.
But just because it was done poorly in that game, doesn't mean that it would be done poorly in all games to come.
Seriously. It's Are'el. This forum doesn't allow apostrophes in usernames.
To me....instancing is bad. It reminds me that I am playing a video game...which...in an environment designed to draw one into it's world....is bad. If I wanted to just play a video game many xbox and ps3 games would do much better. Instancing is more co-op than mmorpg. Competition with massive amounts of other players is PART of the game. I think this poster got his butt kicked alot in game.
So..You are not reminded that you are playing a video game when another group comes along and asks you if you are here for this specific boss, and if they are then you have to stand in "line" and wait for it to RESPAWN ?
C'on..The whole thing with respawn is as unrealistic as it gets, with instacing atleast you get the feel of winning, actually winning..In a non instanced game all things remain the same at all times..after you killed the boss the dungeon isnt cleared and all teh enemies is back again..
What it does bring is a more hectic game play, but it sure do tell me it's a video game..
/thark
Their is no waiting to kill a boss mob....least....I have yet to have to wait on one to spawn.
Of course those and many other things all remind one that they are playing a video game...BUT...few are as intrusive as the loading of an instance.
Seeing other players running around ...sometimes helping ya..sometimes getting in your way bring the mmo into mmorpg...instancing is more of a co-op situation. If I wanted that...I'd play my xbox instead.
If you want intelligent content , you have to pay the price of loading of an instance..You cant have any kind of intelligent content in Vanguard ....Sorry
The LDoN gear upgrades making the (at the time new) instanced stuff the default for all XP grouping was a big part of me leaving EQ.
I don't like instancing, I don't like MMO's with instancing, too much instancing and it's not even a MMO - read guild wars. The more instancing there is the worse the community is it seems, probably because there's alot less reason to exercise social skills and just drops in default selfish mode - everything I see is MINE! All the comments about drama & spawn camping & kill stealing in MMO's is a very slanted biased presentation - for every 1 moment of experiencing that, I've had 250 moments of benefits to offset, be it help with a CR, buff exchange, rez for fallen team-mates or myself, help from another group, finding new members if people have to quit, just heading to an area and being able to join a group or meging to finish a quest or tough encounter or just a social chat and getting to know the other people around on the server and around your level of content.
It's great that there is different mechanics available to suit differing tastes. However personally I think alot of MMO design recently has taken a wrong turn of the magnitude of council estate concrete tower block developments of the 60's-70's, hailed as a marvelous innovation of modern living then, they are clearly seen as a failed social engineering experiment now, which created more problems than they solved.
A MMO that's interesting to me is about creating 1 world, and encouraging a community to emerge to populate it, not about creating the most sanitised assembly line for rapidly producing max level characters without necessarily having to interact with anyone else along the way.
How many people did I know from outside my guild in WoW compared to how many in UO, how many guild officers regularly speak and interact with each other in Guildwars compared to EQ, how much a part of a community did I feel in COH/V compared to Ryzom etc etc.
No instancing builds community, instancing just lets you avoid having to exercise social skills in your pursuit of shiny pixels.
Instancing is just lazy MMO design, you dont need as much content if you use instancing, you can keep dozens of groups busy at the same time with same piece of content. It is far more creative and demanding on the MMO developer to provide a fully non-instanced MMO with enough content to keep players spread out.
I know for a fact I would have been playing WoW a lot longer than I did if Blizzard had spent some time and effort making 100 non-instanced dungeons instead of a handful of instanced ones. Once you have done MC, BRS, BWL, etc a dozen times they got very dull with the only variation you get is when someone messes up.
Also, instancing essentially turns an MMO back into an old style multiplayer game, part of the whole point in MMOs is the interactions with 1000s of other players. Part of playing MMOs is dealing with other players, be it sharing camps or dealing with people that try to train you or kill your mobs.
Instance = Challenge (the first few times any way)
A non instanced boss is easy mode, you go there with 30 guys, when he can easily be done with 5 and just farm him for hours, kill>wait>kill>wait, no challenge, with an instance, you kill the boss once then you need to reset (if not on a 3 or 5 day timers like some WoW bosses) and start over to kill it again after dealign with the trash b4 hand, and your limited to a set number players for the fight.
If anything Instances require alot more team work and planning becuase your limted to X players, none instance just go zerg a boss with as many guys you can get hold off.
But you enjoy being DPS guy #5 or healer guy number #3 then play VG or WoW (40man dungeons)
Originally posted by parmenion probably because there's alot less reason to exercise social skills and just drops in default selfish mode - everything I see is MINE! All the comments about drama & spawn camping & kill stealing in MMO's is a very slanted biased presentation - for every 1 moment of experiencing that, I've had 250 moments of benefits to offset, be it help with a CR, buff exchange, rez for fallen team-mates or myself, help from another group, finding new members if people have to quit, just heading to an area and being able to join a group or meging to finish a quest or tough encounter or just a social chat and getting to know the other people around on the server and around your level of content.
Selfish? Nice generalization.
I suppose if you're one of those, "it takes a village" types, then yes, the things you mention are benefitial. I prefer to succeed or fail on my own merits. As such, they're annoyances at best.
No offence, but people need to stop refering to Guild Wars to prove their points about instancing. Not only is GW NOT AN MMO, it's also purely instanced. No one is saying that Vanguard should be nothing but instances. I haven't even seen anyone yet say that they'd want to spend every gaming moment in an instance. It's all about moderation. A few instances for a few dungeons, so they can offer a better variety of gameplay. What do instances offer? Complex scenarios, for one. A non instanced dungeon more or less involves killing trashj mobs and killing bosses. An instances can offer escorts, deformable environments, rituals and puzzles, unique mob challenges, and maybe even an interactive story. Second, it makes it so you don't have to be griefed by others, intentionally or unintentionally. Nothing like getting wiped by someone else's aggro, or having to wait in line for a boss. Finally, instances can be geared for a specific group size, making it more challenging. Without instances, all you need to do is gather more players to gank whatever boss you're after as soon as it spawns. I also don't buy the "it's not massively multiplayer" arguement. As I said, it's all about variety. The people here in favor of instances just want them for occasional purposes. And besides, there is so much more to Massively Multiplayer than seeing other people at all times. There's trading, resource gathering, grouping for quests, socializing. And to be honest, after spending an entire week dealing with people saying idiotic crap in chat, people running up and stealing your kills, people begging for gold, people jumping around you like maniacal jackrabbits... it's nice to just gather a few of you closest friends or guildmates, and spend an hour or two performing a quest that's intended just for your group. As I said earier in the thread, WoW is both an excellent example of how to do instancing, and a bad one. For the first part of the game, instances are something you do every now and then. Not all the time. There are plenty of persistant options, far more than there are instances. It's only after the endgame bait-and-switch that instancing is given a bad name. Endgame, all relevant content in in instances. And that isn't right. But just because it was done poorly in that game, doesn't mean that it would be done poorly in all games to come.
You know, I had never really considered how I felt about instancing till now. I think a game should have a mix of instanced and non instanced. Especially in a PvP environment. I am very nostalgic about EQ1. I played for 5 years. And put a lot of time sweat and tears into it. I play WoW on and off but tend to get bored every 5 levels or so. In a pve game sometimes the challenge of dealing with other players to get what you want adds that spice that you need to make your game. But, if you are playing on a timer. Having instances is an awsome way to ensure you can accomplish something besides sitting in PoK lfg.
So I would say I definately like both systems. And think any well balanced game should offer both.
Okay, you got 1 point out of my post from a rather context-less quote but essentially I'm not going to argue the generalization.
Instanced, everything you see belongs to your group, it's a selling point for some.
Uninstanced, not everything you see belongs to your group, not only will you meet other people outside your group but you may have to accomodate or even share stuff with them, it's a selling point to other people.
It's far from the only reason, but a lack of instancing is part of the contributary factors for why I've found the communities more attractive in non-instanced games to date.
UO, EQ, Ryzom - all communities I've enjoyed, WoW, Guildwars CoH-V all communties I've felt something was missing.
What bothers me is that most developers feel that they should only have one or the other. IMHO there is a place for both instanced and non-instanced dungeons.
It is sometimes nice to go into an instanced dungeon and not have to worry about anything except the mobs. An instance also allows encounters to be a little more scripted, which allows the developers to set up some really interesting raids.
However, non-instanced dungeons also have their perks. They can be very dynamic and exhilirating. Some of the most fun I have ever had in an mmorpg was racing other guilds to Trakanon in EQ. How fast can your guild go? How much can they push themselves before they make a mistake and wipe the raid?
"Those who dislike things based only on the fact that they are popular are just as shallow and superficial as those who only like them for the same reason."
I played Lineage 2, which is a non-instanced PVP-based game, for 3 years. Non-instancing IS the way to go. Anything else is just a waste of time. The only instanced game I ever enjoyed was Guild Wars . . and they did it right. They instanced everything . . and never promoted themselves as an MMO. Frankly, in my opinion, if you have instances you're not playing an MMO. World of Warcraft is a cool game, but it is not a true MMO. It is a hybrid.
My biggest problem with WOW is that everything is so readily accessible. If you want to raid, you just get a bunch of people together and go raid. There are very few "real world" intangibles that can stop you.
In a TRUE world, you have to plan not only for the raid, but also every intangible in between. Sure, some may see this as a pain in the neck, but let me tell you, the sense of accomplishment is much greater, You might fail 20 times to do something, but you learn from your mistakes and build on what you've done right. Then you go out there and put what you've learned into motion.
The fun of raiding in a PVP game is not only the raid itself, but also the fact that you CAN get ganked while doing the raid. In WOW, the game is all about the numbers . . the variables . . the mathematical chance to get it done. In other words, it is robotic in nature. I say give me a game with more variables.
I think most modern mmorpgs should be a hybrid of single-party instances, multi-party (which no one has mentioned yet), and global content.
I think the global content should be the connective tissue that holds the world together, such that you have to travel through these areas to get to the instanced and multi-instanced (hereafter MI) content.
Certainly not every encounter area should be instanced, but it should be MI.
MI, for those of you that don't know is a system whereby when some density of players or parties is reached spawns another identical instance. EQ2 did this, and of course did it badly, like most everything else they did.
Done adequately, MI would allow some competition in bottleneck areas without making the experience miserable.
Properly done, I imagine that the progression would be: Non-instanced > MI > I, but not always.
Lower level content probably needs to be more heavily instanced than higher level content unless the content demands instancing (as it is easily fouled by others).
As the players moved into higher content, more encounter areas would be non-instanced or multi instanced as opposed to instanced unless it was a trial or boss mob.
I'd think most boss mobs need to flag the player for some length of time to improve the experience and make the trials worth more in terms of a victory. If the player only gets ONE chance a week to kill Slorg The Angry Halfling Chieftain and has to plow across the world and through the MI Angry Halfling Village to get to the chieftain's chamber, then she's gonna make that try count.
instances are much easier to balance for developers, as they have more control over how many characters can be brought to bear against a given obstacle or mob.
Contrarily, instancing does cut down on the immersion factor considerably. MI not so much, but some, and some asshat guilds will try to play the system to get an instance all for themselves and farm the hell out of it.
There isn't any reason why an MI couldn't be timelocked either, but I wonder why that would be so unless you wanted to REALLY make that time-locked instance a pain to get into.
No reason why MI instances couldn't be cooperative or instances be cooperative either.
For example: The Castle of Eternal Dread (MI) has a shield around a long abandoned throne room. In order to get in there, strike team 1 has to enter a timed instance via a painting on a wall in a tower. Strike team 2 has to enter the instanced King's Manor and fight their way to the throne room chamber.
Strike team one's instance allows them to down the shield and enter the Kings Entryway as long as it has been cleared by strike team 2. If strike team 2 hasn't reached and cleared it, then strike team 1 will die when they zone in. (They pop in the middle of a bunch of very angry mobs.)
Strike team 2's timed trial is to reach and clear the King's Entryway before strike team 1 has knocked down the portal.
However, if the portal isn't downed by the end of its time trial, then the King's Bodyguards sally forth into strike team 2, which should probably mean their deaths as the King's Bodyguards should be scaled to 2 party level.
If both are done on time, then both groups get to enter into the King's Throneroom and attempt to massacre him.
(As an alternate, perhaps a 3rd party could enter a 3rd instance and commando their way into the King's Bodyguard Chamber and whack them before 1 and 2 arrive.)
The point is, much more flexible and exciting content can be developed using a hybrid system without impinging on any of the other social aspects of the game, including training and ksing. (Although I hate them.)
Is competing with players for LIMITED ressources a problem?
IMO, it is. When you don't have instancing, even if the system would be 100% done in order to avoid competition between players, you still occupy the same space, thereby not everyone can do what they want. When you can't play the game because of other players is when it is bothering me. So far, only instancing/lack of players solve this aspect.
As much as devs want to tell you that boss X, Y or Z is linked to your group only, to spawn it, there are limited hunting grounds. Some are better than other, some are bound to trains from other players (what a getto situation, to be trained by players, this is sooo backward). I like been able to save fellow players, I don't like been train. The solution pass through instancing again IMO. If a group of players are about to wipe or in troubles, their instanced zone spawn could have an indicator, any passerby could be free to enter and help them, inside their instance...if the group allows it. See, instancing doesn't mean nobody can enter your dungeon, it means that nobody can mess into it without you wanting them to. If a group is in troubles, they can just have a flag saying they accept help, a player at their instance entrance is free to help them...or to ignore them. Instancing also resolve the "respawn" issue, the devs are free to put ambushes, but those are planned, not some random respawn. The group leader might even be offered a "freeze" option, a LOADING screen when a new player(rescuer) enters the zone, with: "Rescue on the way" and some graphic showing the incoming player(s) to help them...the instance-wide chat should be enable during that time, so everyone can talk and get ready, even the new player(s) before resuming the game...
Instancing is a tool. Hating instancing is like hating a tool. If some peoples would tell me they hate shovels in general and never use some and focus a lot on this, I would find this odd. Instancing is a tool. Instancing doesn't make or break you're MMO, it enhance it performance.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I played Lineage 2, which is a non-instanced PVP-based game, for 3 years. Non-instancing IS the way to go. Anything else is just a waste of time. The only instanced game I ever enjoyed was Guild Wars . . and they did it right. They instanced everything . . and never promoted themselves as an MMO. Frankly, in my opinion, if you have instances you're not playing an MMO. World of Warcraft is a cool game, but it is not a true MMO. It is a hybrid.
My biggest problem with WOW is that everything is so readily accessible. If you want to raid, you just get a bunch of people together and go raid. There are very few "real world" intangibles that can stop you.
In a TRUE world, you have to plan not only for the raid, but also every intangible in between. Sure, some may see this as a pain in the neck, but let me tell you, the sense of accomplishment is much greater, You might fail 20 times to do something, but you learn from your mistakes and build on what you've done right. Then you go out there and put what you've learned into motion.
The fun of raiding in a PVP game is not only the raid itself, but also the fact that you CAN get ganked while doing the raid. In WOW, the game is all about the numbers . . the variables . . the mathematical chance to get it done. In other words, it is robotic in nature. I say give me a game with more variables.
Variables are a good thing, but in Blizzard's defense, let's look at this from a different perspective.
They've got 8.5 million people paying to play their game. They could spend the time and resources to create plenty of non-instanced dungeons that allow for all of those variables, but the end result of that is that they'd be giving themselves the added headache of those same 8.5 million people suddenly squabbling over being ganked on a raid, or ninja-looted, or having to compete for spawns and/or loot with groups of people that are farming the dungeon for their lower level alts or PL'ing their guildmates, etc. It's better for them in the long run if they limit non-instanced boss/raid-type encounters so they cut down on as much of that wankery as possible.
A game as large as WoW needs instances just to make life easier for the devs. A game like Vanguard? Not so much. VG can get away with not having them at all, because it's a smaller niche title, and isn't dealing with millions of players at the same time.
Comments
With it's current population, VG can afford to have non-instanced dungeons, and not have all the drama and angst that was part of LGuk, Karnors, Sebilis, et all.
I prefer instanced dungeons, personally. I just don't find any enjoyment in dealing with groups camping various parts of the dungeon. Particularly when it's some level 50 farming gear for his twink. Or a gaggle of gold farmers.
The griefer types that got there yayas by train wave after wave of mobs in the dungeon. Or just regular people that figure if they're gonna die, they're gonna take as many other people with them as possible. Regardless of their reasoning for having non-instanced dungeons, I really don't know why they didn't learn their lesson with trains...
All in all, the problems inherent with open dungeons just don't outweigh the benefits for me.
Personally I favour instancing because the less instancing there has been in a game the more I have liked the community (compare Ryzom community to GuildWars community - I realise more than just instancing affecst this but it certainly plays a part).
I play a Massively Multiplayer game to see plenty of people around in the world, not just in a glorified chat room (town). I'm playing with a regular complete group, in an instanced game I would have met no1 else, in an uninstanced world I keep bumping into the same folks a few levels on in another dungeon or area, it's great on the whole and an opportunity to chat in tells, give a drive by buff or wave etc - it adds something valuable to the experience for me.
I find that feeling part of a world is a far more interesting upside than the downside of anyone interfering with my acquiring shiny pixels.
So..You are not reminded that you are playing a video game when another group comes along and asks you if you are here for this specific boss, and if they are then you have to stand in "line" and wait for it to RESPAWN ?
C'on..The whole thing with respawn is as unrealistic as it gets, with instacing atleast you get the feel of winning, actually winning..In a non instanced game all things remain the same at all times..after you killed the boss the dungeon isnt cleared and all teh enemies is back again..
What it does bring is a more hectic game play, but it sure do tell me it's a video game..
/thark
Their is no waiting to kill a boss mob....least....I have yet to have to wait on one to spawn.
Of course those and many other things all remind one that they are playing a video game...BUT...few are as intrusive as the loading of an instance.
Seeing other players running around ...sometimes helping ya..sometimes getting in your way bring the mmo into mmorpg...instancing is more of a co-op situation. If I wanted that...I'd play my xbox instead.
No offence, but people need to stop refering to Guild Wars to prove their points about instancing. Not only is GW NOT AN MMO, it's also purely instanced. No one is saying that Vanguard should be nothing but instances. I haven't even seen anyone yet say that they'd want to spend every gaming moment in an instance.
It's all about moderation. A few instances for a few dungeons, so they can offer a better variety of gameplay. What do instances offer? Complex scenarios, for one. A non instanced dungeon more or less involves killing trashj mobs and killing bosses. An instances can offer escorts, deformable environments, rituals and puzzles, unique mob challenges, and maybe even an interactive story. Second, it makes it so you don't have to be griefed by others, intentionally or unintentionally. Nothing like getting wiped by someone else's aggro, or having to wait in line for a boss. Finally, instances can be geared for a specific group size, making it more challenging. Without instances, all you need to do is gather more players to gank whatever boss you're after as soon as it spawns.
I also don't buy the "it's not massively multiplayer" arguement. As I said, it's all about variety. The people here in favor of instances just want them for occasional purposes. And besides, there is so much more to Massively Multiplayer than seeing other people at all times. There's trading, resource gathering, grouping for quests, socializing. And to be honest, after spending an entire week dealing with people saying idiotic crap in chat, people running up and stealing your kills, people begging for gold, people jumping around you like maniacal jackrabbits... it's nice to just gather a few of you closest friends or guildmates, and spend an hour or two performing a quest that's intended just for your group.
As I said earier in the thread, WoW is both an excellent example of how to do instancing, and a bad one. For the first part of the game, instances are something you do every now and then. Not all the time. There are plenty of persistant options, far more than there are instances. It's only after the endgame bait-and-switch that instancing is given a bad name. Endgame, all relevant content in in instances. And that isn't right.
But just because it was done poorly in that game, doesn't mean that it would be done poorly in all games to come.
Seriously.
It's Are'el. This forum doesn't allow apostrophes in usernames.
So..You are not reminded that you are playing a video game when another group comes along and asks you if you are here for this specific boss, and if they are then you have to stand in "line" and wait for it to RESPAWN ?
C'on..The whole thing with respawn is as unrealistic as it gets, with instacing atleast you get the feel of winning, actually winning..In a non instanced game all things remain the same at all times..after you killed the boss the dungeon isnt cleared and all teh enemies is back again..
What it does bring is a more hectic game play, but it sure do tell me it's a video game..
/thark
Their is no waiting to kill a boss mob....least....I have yet to have to wait on one to spawn.
Of course those and many other things all remind one that they are playing a video game...BUT...few are as intrusive as the loading of an instance.
Seeing other players running around ...sometimes helping ya..sometimes getting in your way bring the mmo into mmorpg...instancing is more of a co-op situation. If I wanted that...I'd play my xbox instead.
If you want intelligent content , you have to pay the price of loading of an instance..You cant have any kind of intelligent content in Vanguard ....Sorry
/thark
I don't like instancing, I don't like MMO's with instancing, too much instancing and it's not even a MMO - read guild wars. The more instancing there is the worse the community is it seems, probably because there's alot less reason to exercise social skills and just drops in default selfish mode - everything I see is MINE! All the comments about drama & spawn camping & kill stealing in MMO's is a very slanted biased presentation - for every 1 moment of experiencing that, I've had 250 moments of benefits to offset, be it help with a CR, buff exchange, rez for fallen team-mates or myself, help from another group, finding new members if people have to quit, just heading to an area and being able to join a group or meging to finish a quest or tough encounter or just a social chat and getting to know the other people around on the server and around your level of content.
It's great that there is different mechanics available to suit differing tastes. However personally I think alot of MMO design recently has taken a wrong turn of the magnitude of council estate concrete tower block developments of the 60's-70's, hailed as a marvelous innovation of modern living then, they are clearly seen as a failed social engineering experiment now, which created more problems than they solved.
A MMO that's interesting to me is about creating 1 world, and encouraging a community to emerge to populate it, not about creating the most sanitised assembly line for rapidly producing max level characters without necessarily having to interact with anyone else along the way.
How many people did I know from outside my guild in WoW compared to how many in UO, how many guild officers regularly speak and interact with each other in Guildwars compared to EQ, how much a part of a community did I feel in COH/V compared to Ryzom etc etc.
No instancing builds community, instancing just lets you avoid having to exercise social skills in your pursuit of shiny pixels.
Instancing is just lazy MMO design, you dont need as much content if you use instancing, you can keep dozens of groups busy at the same time with same piece of content. It is far more creative and demanding on the MMO developer to provide a fully non-instanced MMO with enough content to keep players spread out.
I know for a fact I would have been playing WoW a lot longer than I did if Blizzard had spent some time and effort making 100 non-instanced dungeons instead of a handful of instanced ones. Once you have done MC, BRS, BWL, etc a dozen times they got very dull with the only variation you get is when someone messes up.
Also, instancing essentially turns an MMO back into an old style multiplayer game, part of the whole point in MMOs is the interactions with 1000s of other players. Part of playing MMOs is dealing with other players, be it sharing camps or dealing with people that try to train you or kill your mobs.
Instance = Challenge (the first few times any way)
A non instanced boss is easy mode, you go there with 30 guys, when he can easily be done with 5 and just farm him for hours, kill>wait>kill>wait, no challenge, with an instance, you kill the boss once then you need to reset (if not on a 3 or 5 day timers like some WoW bosses) and start over to kill it again after dealign with the trash b4 hand, and your limited to a set number players for the fight.
If anything Instances require alot more team work and planning becuase your limted to X players, none instance just go zerg a boss with as many guys you can get hold off.
But you enjoy being DPS guy #5 or healer guy number #3 then play VG or WoW (40man dungeons)
Selfish? Nice generalization.
I suppose if you're one of those, "it takes a village" types, then yes, the things you mention are benefitial. I prefer to succeed or fail on my own merits. As such, they're annoyances at best.
You know, I had never really considered how I felt about instancing till now. I think a game should have a mix of instanced and non instanced. Especially in a PvP environment. I am very nostalgic about EQ1. I played for 5 years. And put a lot of time sweat and tears into it. I play WoW on and off but tend to get bored every 5 levels or so. In a pve game sometimes the challenge of dealing with other players to get what you want adds that spice that you need to make your game. But, if you are playing on a timer. Having instances is an awsome way to ensure you can accomplish something besides sitting in PoK lfg.
So I would say I definately like both systems. And think any well balanced game should offer both.
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Instanced, everything you see belongs to your group, it's a selling point for some.
Uninstanced, not everything you see belongs to your group, not only will you meet other people outside your group but you may have to accomodate or even share stuff with them, it's a selling point to other people.
It's far from the only reason, but a lack of instancing is part of the contributary factors for why I've found the communities more attractive in non-instanced games to date.
UO, EQ, Ryzom - all communities I've enjoyed, WoW, Guildwars CoH-V all communties I've felt something was missing.
Not a problem so far, and the community is a darn sight nicer than other MMOs ive played - thats one bonus of non-instanced games.
What bothers me is that most developers feel that they should only have one or the other. IMHO there is a place for both instanced and non-instanced dungeons.
It is sometimes nice to go into an instanced dungeon and not have to worry about anything except the mobs. An instance also allows encounters to be a little more scripted, which allows the developers to set up some really interesting raids.
However, non-instanced dungeons also have their perks. They can be very dynamic and exhilirating. Some of the most fun I have ever had in an mmorpg was racing other guilds to Trakanon in EQ. How fast can your guild go? How much can they push themselves before they make a mistake and wipe the raid?
"Those who dislike things based only on the fact that they are popular are just as shallow and superficial as those who only like them for the same reason."
My biggest problem with WOW is that everything is so readily accessible. If you want to raid, you just get a bunch of people together and go raid. There are very few "real world" intangibles that can stop you.
In a TRUE world, you have to plan not only for the raid, but also every intangible in between. Sure, some may see this as a pain in the neck, but let me tell you, the sense of accomplishment is much greater, You might fail 20 times to do something, but you learn from your mistakes and build on what you've done right. Then you go out there and put what you've learned into motion.
The fun of raiding in a PVP game is not only the raid itself, but also the fact that you CAN get ganked while doing the raid. In WOW, the game is all about the numbers . . the variables . . the mathematical chance to get it done. In other words, it is robotic in nature. I say give me a game with more variables.
http://aion.24-hrgaming.net
I think the global content should be the connective tissue that holds the world together, such that you have to travel through these areas to get to the instanced and multi-instanced (hereafter MI) content.
Certainly not every encounter area should be instanced, but it should be MI.
MI, for those of you that don't know is a system whereby when some density of players or parties is reached spawns another identical instance. EQ2 did this, and of course did it badly, like most everything else they did.
Done adequately, MI would allow some competition in bottleneck areas without making the experience miserable.
Properly done, I imagine that the progression would be: Non-instanced > MI > I, but not always.
Lower level content probably needs to be more heavily instanced than higher level content unless the content demands instancing (as it is easily fouled by others).
As the players moved into higher content, more encounter areas would be non-instanced or multi instanced as opposed to instanced unless it was a trial or boss mob.
I'd think most boss mobs need to flag the player for some length of time to improve the experience and make the trials worth more in terms of a victory. If the player only gets ONE chance a week to kill Slorg The Angry Halfling Chieftain and has to plow across the world and through the MI Angry Halfling Village to get to the chieftain's chamber, then she's gonna make that try count.
instances are much easier to balance for developers, as they have more control over how many characters can be brought to bear against a given obstacle or mob.
Contrarily, instancing does cut down on the immersion factor considerably. MI not so much, but some, and some asshat guilds will try to play the system to get an instance all for themselves and farm the hell out of it.
There isn't any reason why an MI couldn't be timelocked either, but I wonder why that would be so unless you wanted to REALLY make that time-locked instance a pain to get into.
No reason why MI instances couldn't be cooperative or instances be cooperative either.
For example: The Castle of Eternal Dread (MI) has a shield around a long abandoned throne room. In order to get in there, strike team 1 has to enter a timed instance via a painting on a wall in a tower. Strike team 2 has to enter the instanced King's Manor and fight their way to the throne room chamber.
Strike team one's instance allows them to down the shield and enter the Kings Entryway as long as it has been cleared by strike team 2. If strike team 2 hasn't reached and cleared it, then strike team 1 will die when they zone in. (They pop in the middle of a bunch of very angry mobs.)
Strike team 2's timed trial is to reach and clear the King's Entryway before strike team 1 has knocked down the portal.
However, if the portal isn't downed by the end of its time trial, then the King's Bodyguards sally forth into strike team 2, which should probably mean their deaths as the King's Bodyguards should be scaled to 2 party level.
If both are done on time, then both groups get to enter into the King's Throneroom and attempt to massacre him.
(As an alternate, perhaps a 3rd party could enter a 3rd instance and commando their way into the King's Bodyguard Chamber and whack them before 1 and 2 arrive.)
The point is, much more flexible and exciting content can be developed using a hybrid system without impinging on any of the other social aspects of the game, including training and ksing. (Although I hate them.)
Is competing with players for LIMITED ressources a problem?
IMO, it is. When you don't have instancing, even if the system would be 100% done in order to avoid competition between players, you still occupy the same space, thereby not everyone can do what they want. When you can't play the game because of other players is when it is bothering me. So far, only instancing/lack of players solve this aspect.
As much as devs want to tell you that boss X, Y or Z is linked to your group only, to spawn it, there are limited hunting grounds. Some are better than other, some are bound to trains from other players (what a getto situation, to be trained by players, this is sooo backward). I like been able to save fellow players, I don't like been train. The solution pass through instancing again IMO. If a group of players are about to wipe or in troubles, their instanced zone spawn could have an indicator, any passerby could be free to enter and help them, inside their instance...if the group allows it. See, instancing doesn't mean nobody can enter your dungeon, it means that nobody can mess into it without you wanting them to. If a group is in troubles, they can just have a flag saying they accept help, a player at their instance entrance is free to help them...or to ignore them. Instancing also resolve the "respawn" issue, the devs are free to put ambushes, but those are planned, not some random respawn. The group leader might even be offered a "freeze" option, a LOADING screen when a new player(rescuer) enters the zone, with: "Rescue on the way" and some graphic showing the incoming player(s) to help them...the instance-wide chat should be enable during that time, so everyone can talk and get ready, even the new player(s) before resuming the game...
Instancing is a tool. Hating instancing is like hating a tool. If some peoples would tell me they hate shovels in general and never use some and focus a lot on this, I would find this odd. Instancing is a tool. Instancing doesn't make or break you're MMO, it enhance it performance.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Variables are a good thing, but in Blizzard's defense, let's look at this from a different perspective.
They've got 8.5 million people paying to play their game. They could spend the time and resources to create plenty of non-instanced dungeons that allow for all of those variables, but the end result of that is that they'd be giving themselves the added headache of those same 8.5 million people suddenly squabbling over being ganked on a raid, or ninja-looted, or having to compete for spawns and/or loot with groups of people that are farming the dungeon for their lower level alts or PL'ing their guildmates, etc. It's better for them in the long run if they limit non-instanced boss/raid-type encounters so they cut down on as much of that wankery as possible.
A game as large as WoW needs instances just to make life easier for the devs. A game like Vanguard? Not so much. VG can get away with not having them at all, because it's a smaller niche title, and isn't dealing with millions of players at the same time.