Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
VG adpots instancing.
Milky
Member Posts: 339
http://forums.station.sony.com/vg/posts/list.m?topic_id=22946
Not such a "seamless" world anymore.
Comments
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
I dont have a problem with instances in games as long as they dont go overboard like ddo. Its not even a true instance. It will allow multiple groups and the there will only be one set of bosses.
Time will tell if it remains that way or if they pull it off successfully. At least it shows they are planning ahead and trying to ward off apw crashing and burning straight out the gate.
Generally, my theory is that "instance" when employed correctly add value to a game.
I actually like how they are somewhat thinking outside of the box while trying to remain true to the spirit and vision of the game.
By the way, the port warehouse does not excite me. I am not much of a raider, and I am not confident that jamming all these raid mobs into a single instance/zone/area/dungeon is the right thing to do. Perhaps the raiders will like it (the minority of them who play to raid).
Raiding I think tends to ruin MMORPGs (see, e.g., Molten Core in WoW. see also PoP in EQ 1).
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
the will be no instancing... just overflow to prevent major lag issues:
"
Not at all, what he said was that they have made a overflow chunk to accomodate the first few weeks when you have every guild on the server who's been starved for content rushing to apw. The way they made this work, was they made a porting clicky device at the actual entrance to APW, that when clicked leads to a COPY of APW in One of several other chunks (putting it beneath world) this is only inacted when a DEV determines that there are to many players trying to get into APW for ONE Chunk to take, so they open a overflow chunk to allow people to move to a less bogged down.
Contrary to the previous poster, they actually have gotten it so apw can handle over 90 players at once, but there is going to be a heck of alot more people trying to get into APW on the first night. Secondly this isnt instancing this is overflow, Instancing is where a entire raid gets its OWN dungeon to play in, This is merely where if theres more than 90 people in apw at one time, they will open a 2nd Chunk of APW to accomodate more players and maintain play experience, This IS like everquest 2 where youd have to many players in one zone, and a 2nd copy would be opened.
This game does not support instancing, the Overflow apw's are actually in CHUNKS beneath the world there is nowhere to put instancing of all dungeons. The "i told you so" thing is kinda silly as your totally worng about it.
As a final note, Read up on the exact change, dont read these silly posts where people dont even have full information and Pretty much make up their own meaning."
I think that is a good explanation. E.g., when I started to play Rise of Kunark for EQ 2, I was in Timorous Deep 4 because the other 3 were so crowded. If this became full, then a Timorous Deep 5 would open.
-----
WoW and fast food = commercial successes.
I neither play WoW nor eat fast food.
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
"This IS like everquest 2 where youd have to many players in one zone, and a 2nd copy would be opened."
--------------------------
I hate to burst you guys' bubble, but what you're describing here IS instancing. I don't care if it's 1 copy per group or raid, 1 copy per 5 groups, 90 players per copy, or anything similar. If there are more than ONE, then each of them is an "instance" of the same area.
If you're at all familiar with programming, and more specifically, object-oriented programming, then you understand the concept of an object being an "instance" of a class, and that you can have multiple instances, or copies, of a class.
These areas/zones/chunks in these games are nothing more than very complex objects that are instantiations, or copies, of the classes that define them. In a "seamless" game, there is only 1 copy of each. In games like EQ2 and WoW, there are areas that are identical and simultaneously co-exist, whether they be single dungeons (WoW) or entire areas (EQ2).
Either way, the bottom line is that they are duplicate instances/copies of the same areas, regardless of the rules governing how and when a copy is made. No matter which way you try to justify it or say it's not technically instancing, you're wrong - the use of multiple copies of the same area = instancing. If Vanguard is going to have multiple copies of any of it's areas, then it is employing the use of instancing. Period.
This sounds EXACTLY like how EQ2 did their dungeons, not like how WoW does theirs. And personally speaking, I don't have a problem with it.
IMO its the most efficient way of dealing with heavy traffic throughput but still allowing multple groups in the same dungeon.
And to those potential "screamers" about having a seamless world, its not the first time that VG dungeons are connected to the world via a porting feature. Theres a dungeon just outside Tursh that does the same since launch. Although theres only one copy of it running.
Top 10 Most Misused Words in MMO's
Okay, you've attacked him for his joining date with the super original pseudo insult "go back to WoW", yet you have not refuted one single point he made. If you think he's wrong, why not go ahead and attack the flaws in his logic instead of something completely irrelevant like a joining date? I'm curious, how is a copy of an existing area not containing all characters online within the established confines of a specific server community not an instance?
I actually have an objective view point on the subject, as I don't care either way for or against instancing - it's all about whether it's done right or not. I don't play any of the games mentioned here, but I do know what instancing is and I was simply clarifying that.
Whether I have been a member for 1 hour or 1 decade is irrelevant..... the statements I made in the post above are not my opinion - they are fact - and whether you choose to believe them or not has no effect on their validity.
If you choose to take my post as some sort of troll or attack, you are greatly mistaken. Again, it was to provide clarification on what INSTANCING is and is not. Nothing more, nothing less.
I thought your post was polite and concise, I have no clue why this guy felt so threatened he had to attack you over your joining date and hit you with the tired and played out "go back to WoW, lol" that seems to be the rote insult for those lacking the creativity to come up with their own on these forums.
It is instancing plain and simple. A copy is exactly that, a copy. Who gives a crap how many can be on said copy, it is still a copy. I think though, for some reason, in Vanguards case at least, this may help things with all the lag and such. You try throwing 100's of people in one area, and it is either going to be lag central, or even possibly crashing the server. The instance does provide a workaround solution, but it is supposed to be seamless, so if you aren't going to hold true to your word, then quit saying things that aren't facts. Just my 2 cents.
I thought your post was polite and concise, I have no clue why this guy felt so threatened he had to attack you over your joining date and hit you with the tired and played out "go back to WoW, lol" that seems to be the rote insult for those lacking the creativity to come up with their own on these forums.
Thanks - it's nice to know at least one person got what I was trying to say.
What I find most interesting is how the people who police threads for "trolls" end up being trolls themselves. At least my post actually contributed to the topic of the thread. I guess to some, post count and "join date seniority" are more important than a post's relevance to the thread topic.
I mean, a person's join date really is the true measure of the value of their posts, right? /sarcasm
Sorry, but what is your definition of trolling? Could you clarify?
Does it include making random, attacking posts against other posters who have made ON TOPIC posts that are relevant to the thread topic?
"Freedom is just another name for nothing left to lose" - Janis Joplin
.jpg)
I don't understand why some people are getting hot under the collar about it. I don't like instancing that much, but what devs have proposed is not instancing like WoW, it's a solution to keep the lag and high pings down when APW opens.
What would you prefer a nice lagfest at 1 to 5 FPS or an enjoyable experience. I'm sure if the devs didn't do this, you would get more people screaming blue murder on the forums due to unplayable lag compared with overflow shards.
IMO I think it's a great idea and it shows the dev's want to make the game an enjoyable experience.
I reccomend a nice tinfoil hat to block out the C.I.A.'s mind reading devices.
<Mod edit>
After reading this entire thread, I have concluded that you are the troll.
What SOE is proposing is instancing, like it or not. It may not be a permanent type of instancing like dungeons in WoW, but it is instancing nevertheless. To the person earlier who suggested that zoning into a geographic area was instancing, that is false. Zoning in itself, the loading of an area, is not instancing if that area is shared by everyone.
Hmmm, I don't like instancing, but there just don't look to be any other choice. APW is going to be absolutely jammed packed. At least it's not like traditional instancing where every group gets their own instance to ensure the get all the mobs and loot they want. APW instancing looks like it will occur only when the dungeon is about to get over loaded.... AND the lockout timers still apply across shards.
I would guess, after the initial mad rush, the lock-out timers will start to take affect, people will spread out and hopefully it won't be necessary.
geez i didn't even think VG needed instancing.....its hard enough to even find other peeps to start a group
How big is a "chunk" in Vanguard? 90 people doesn't sound like very much to overload an area. I recall doing at least twice that in EQ even before the expansions. I recall chuncks being pretty big size in area, but maybe this raid chunk is different? This quote just doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
Before Arcken has a pixel aneurysm, I will admit I currently do not play Vanguard nor will I retry till/if SOE completes that "free trial isle" concept. I began reading here because I wanted to learn a bit more about possible "instancing" in Vanguard, but then I stayed tuned for the Arcken soap-opera.
Perhaps we all should allow a moment for Arcken to climb back atop the coveted pretentious throne. It might be a porcelain throne. Arcken seems to follow the school of thought that attacking someone that has a different perspective is a tactic with merit instead of attacking the points of the disagreement. Perhaps by Arcken's judgement I haven't posted enough or maybe I didn't join soon enough to be allowed a voice. People will disagree, but usually when that happens they discuss the points & issues of the topic. Back-up your argued points, debunk theirs, give your opinion on the subject, & that whole, "don't kill the messenger" adage I'm sure applies somehow too.
It is "instancing" which is a tool. Like with all tools good & bad actions & creations can be done with them. I think this application of instancing for Vanguard will do more good than harm from what I've read. I don't trust SOE much anymore since my EQ days, but their intent for Vanguard seems genuine to make it play better & I hope SOE keeps working on Vanguard with the same intent.
Sure, the verbal "seamless world" jab would be brought up. Since Vanguard had touted itself as being a seamless game world it is a valid comment. Will it have much of a negative impact not being totally seamless? I doubt it & I hope Vanguard implements similar tools when SOE deems it neccesary & not just as an "easy button" method. All of our comments are valid whether we agree or disagree even Arcken's when for pure spite.
We mostly want innovative, fun, challenging, progressable, creative games to enjoy afterall ... with puntable Gnomes.
* No Gnomes were harmed during the creation of this post.
<Mod edit>
I think Fahrice is new to the forums....he hasn't learned to not waste his time arguing with the regular forum trolls and fanbois here.
And its true, if having a lot of posts proved some sort of expertise in MMO's than I guess I'd have to be a genius...and Gameloading would be a savant....and I assure you....at least in my case I'm nothing of the sort. (though it does prove I like to post)
But one thing you have to realize Fahrice, many people do exactly what Arcken said, they create alternate accounts to attack various games on these forums..and the most common way to recognize them is when they attack a game on their first post. (VG fans have suffered from this problem for quite a while)
But I agree, your initial post wasn't an attack....you merely stated the 'facts' about instancing in games, and you are spot on from my knowledge of the subject. I think you came across a bit strong though, which set Arcken off. That's all good though...messing with trolls is a common past-time on these forums and as long as you don't mind....enjoy.
But angry trolls aside...welcome to the forums.... and don't judge all of us by the actions of a few.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon