Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
AoC has made me worried...
BesCirga
Member Posts: 806
Hello fellow Spellborn fans..
I think we have all read the posts concerning zones and instancing of zones in the AoC forum, and how ill received it is by the general poplulation. With this in mind, I can't help wondering what the devs of Spellborn must be thinking at this moment, becuase Spellborn is building their world the exact same way as AoC...I am worried.
I personally, am conserned. I beta AoC for 4-5 months and was totally put off with the constant zoning and instanced PvP. Now, the game I have high hopes for, (for me) share so much with AoC; unique combat system, a crafting system not to my satifaction, quest based leveling, class system, beautiful Art and graphics, fun PvP, zoned and instanced world etc...I am worried.
Summarized - Spellborn are at the doorstep and im afraid im gonna logg in with the taint from AoC, unintentionally... I am worried.
Comments
In what way will TCOS be instancing. The dungeons, shops, PvP zones? Kinda like the mini games AoC has?
If they do it but also make it all seamless going from one place to the other I wouldnt mind much. Except from the zones you explore which should be not instanced of course. Dungeons, PvP games is most likely.
You know when you play too much MMO's when your partners pants have become a rare drop.
You are a bit misinformed about Spellborn, I fear. Zoning in this game will be like in EQ2. Instancing of zones will also be like in EQ2: only to prevent overloading of zones. What you probably are referring to, but have not fully comprehended, is talk by the devs about the instancing in Spellborn that will be slightly better than in EQ2, so that when it kicks in players will hardly notice it or be hindered by it. When it kicks in will be dependent on stress testing, but they already revealed that 500 players in a zone (instance) at the same time is no problem at all.
In short: nothing like AoC. Instancing of zones will probably only kick in in the starter zones at launch.
Also the combat sytem is complete different from AoC. It is much more unique than that of AoC. Also it is more dynamic and player skill dependent than combat in AoC.
Stop worrying.
--
Delanor
In short: nothing like AoC.
Also the combat sytem is complete different from AoC. It is much more unique that that of AoC. Also it is more dynamic and player skill dependent than combat in AoC.
Stop worrying.
It's exactly like Aoc in regards to instancing. AoC also employs an instance on demand mechanic that produces more copies of the same geographic content when a threshold of a certain amount of players per zone has been reached.Like the OP said, a lot of people don't like this type of instancing just as a lot of people don't like hard instancing like WoW dungeons. We want a seamless world. One world for all players. Lag is not necessarily a bad thing. It is nature's way of saying there are too many people raping the resources of a certain area and you need to move on or suffer the consequences of lag.
Apart from the fact that the devs have indicated that they have not decided on using this mechanism, because it might not be necessary, when they do it will still be nothing like AoC. Have you played EQ2? Have you experienced the instancing of zones in that game? Did it feel like zone instancing in AoC? No. The reason being the "huge" amount of players that can be in one zone before instancing becomes active. An amount of players that AoC apparently cannot handle, resulting in the game play experiences you see reported saying it does not feel like an mmo. Never saw anyone playing EQ2 complaining about that, and do not expect Spellborn will give reason to complain either.
Of course, I dislike zoning too and mistrust instancing of zones evenmore, but after having seen it in action in EQ2 I know it does not need to be a game breaking feature when applied correctly.
--
Delanor
Can someone give me a link to where the devs say they are going to have this type of instancing. All I've ever seen them say is that they are going to be using a little instancing as possible, mostly for dungeons and such.
I'm probably wrong so I just wanted to see where they said this.
You are misinformed, there will be a lot of instancing.
In the following dev interview you can easily find the following information (http://www.tcos.com/sbforum/viewtopic.php?t=12557)
==================================
MMORPG_Taera: Trickarius asks, Will there be instanced areas within the game? If so, what areas will instancing mainly be based on?
[TCoS]Wolf: Yes... there will be a lot of instanced areas within the game. These areas are mostly dungeon areas, but also Ancestral Quests are part of those instanced areas. Would be rather annoying to see a good guild kill the Demon Army General again.. just before you reached him. I know Adinthalos can be a real pain. but I want him to be a pain for everyone.. not just a select number of people. hence...
[TCoS]Wolf: ...his place is instanced.
[TCoS]Wolf: Several raftyards are also instanced.. meaning that you go there for quests but you don't want other players ruining a certain event. Those are there too.. although those are in a minority group.
You are changing the subject. We were talking about the zones being instanced like in AoC (and EQ2), not about dungeon instancing, which will be there, but we already knew that.
--
Delanor
Ya, I've seen that and I understand that a lot will be instanced now, but he only said that dungeons and ancestral quests will be instanced and raft yards I guess, so I understand why he says a lot. Because those are huge pieces to the game.
But I still haven't seen anywhere that talks about that sort of EQ2 instancing that was buggin the OP.
I will try, but it will not be easy. There is also a post from the devs where they backed away from this idea, but I doubt I can find that either, but I will try.
Edit: found first link http://www.tcos.com/sbforum/viewtopic.php?t=8803&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30
--
Delanor
Thanks, hope you can find it
I will try, but it will not be easy. There is also a post from the devs where they backed away from this idea, but I doubt I can find that either, but I will try.
Edit: found first link http://www.tcos.com/sbforum/viewtopic.php?t=8803&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30
Thanks for the link...The zoning and instancing of zones system is identical of AoC, the number of which is needed before the zone copies it self doesnt really matter, it breaks immersion.
I think Spellborn needs to be more open to their customers about their zoning/instance system, to prevent a foul outburst of posts and threads from angry customers. Look at funcom, they held a lit on the instancing as good as they could up to release - alot of people spent their money on AoC, oblivious about the instancing = many angry customers...
TCOS must be instanced because the world is based in "shards" :-)
I don't know what TCOS will be like to play, but I'm sure it will be great!!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
waiting for ... nothing..
I will try, but it will not be easy. There is also a post from the devs where they backed away from this idea, but I doubt I can find that either, but I will try.
Edit: found first link http://www.tcos.com/sbforum/viewtopic.php?t=8803&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30
Thanks for the link...The zoning and instancing of zones system is identical of AoC, the number of which is needed before the zone copies it self doesnt really matter, it breaks immersion.
I think Spellborn needs to be more open to their customers about their zoning/instance system, to prevent a foul outburst of posts and threads from angry customers. Look at funcom, they held a lit on the instancing as good as they could up to release - alot of people spent their money on AoC, oblivious about the instancing = many angry customers...
wow... I never thought they would do that... well this means TCoS is not my game either..
____________________________
CASUAL CONFESSIONS - Draccan's blog
____________________________
I dont understand what you saying here "have to be instanced because of shards" ... If you mean zoned, not instanced - I agree, offcourse we have to zone from shard to shard, but as I understand it, one shard contains several zones.
Age of Conan creates an instance of the zone after 50 people are in it apparently, also due to the graphics it has to have a instance for everything like going into a building and the reason that the max you will ever see in that game is 48 verses 48 battles is again the graphics.
This game has similar requirements to WoW apparently, and they already tested 1 starting area with 200 people in, remember this is a proper real time combat game not turn based. It is very unlikely that apart from perhaps when a new realm is opened or when everyone first buys the game on launch that you will see more than 200 people in an area.
This game will only create instances after 200 minimum to a maximum of 2000 people are in a zone, and only for specific zones that are not big enough to handle large amounts of players. Very few games even get near 200 in a zone, let alone 2000. Even WoW never has that many people in one area at any one time, I believe the limit for each server is 4000-5000 people.
In world of warcraft the only time I can think I saw atleast 800 people in one zone, is when we opened the anquir'jera instance or however its spelt in Silithus. And the server lasted a graned total of 20 minutes before it crashed for 8 hours lol
I really doubt this game will feel like Age of Conan, most likely this game will get a small to medium sized population say 60k to 100k players due to it being so different to what has been done before plus face it there is very little media buzz about this game or hype. If each universe i.e realm has around 4k-5k players like most mmos do.
Then you will probably never see more than 150-200 people in a zone on average, im going on the basis of a full realm from WoW since it would be the best example for population amounts on a server in a single area.
I think apart from launch most will be spread out throughout the world to the point where creating a instance of a zone is not needed. And even if its a breakaway hit, I believe they have already stated 4000k-5000k max per server similar to other games, as other mmos have shown everyone plays at different times, it is unlikelty the world will feel empty or that it would get full enough to for the need to have to create a zone.
As for instancing, theres instances for dungeons, for ports, and for specific quests. I.E apart from the instanced single player quests and the ports it would be exactly like WoW which is probably why they said a lot of instances because there is a lot of instances in WoW except it is still a persistent game.
I really think people are worrying to much about instancing, and this is comming from someone who hates over instancing (you only need to look at my post history here and on spellborns forums to see that). The immerision or mmo feel would be lost in my opinion if we went in game and saw no more than an average guild size running around due to the amount of instances ala AoC.
200 people though as a minimum and 2k maximum for larger zones is more than enough, and it is unlikely that you would have the problem of logging into the world and not seeing your m8s. And even if you did you could just switch instances.
To address the problem of people not knowing how to do that, how hard would it be for spellborn inc to include it in a tutorial at the start of the game. A bit like the pop up tips that appear when you first start most mmos.
edit: btwI am comparing to WoW since more people are likely to have played it and therefore understand a comparison to that game rather than Everquest 2 ;p
It is a little disappointing that they are going to use instancing, but I think the poster before is right in being optimistic. This game probably won't be as big as AoC (although I hope it is
) and if it does were probably only going to see instancing when the game first starts out and everyone is in the beginning area. After that hopefully this game is made so that people will want to spread out across the world.
Then instances will probably only happen occasionally inside quarterstone.
It is not exactly a strong point of the game, but how can they be more open about it. They revealed it more then a year ago and it is common knowledge in the community. What more can they do?
--
Delanor
You can ask the question which one was first. The decision to make a world devided into shards or the decision to go for zoning? My guess is that they decided for zoning first and came up with the lore to fit the zoning later.
--
Delanor
500 people actually, all heavily in combat, which is not just good news for the need of instancing zones, but also for the future shard conquest.
BTW, thanks for clarifying the point why Spellborn will be nothing like AoC in this respect. Apparently I do not realise enough that people in general do not know these things.
--
Delanor
500 people actually, all heavily in combat, which is not just good news for the need of instancing zones, but also for the future shard conquest.
BTW, thanks for clarifying the point why Spellborn will be nothing like AoC in this respect. Apparently I do not realise enough that people in general do not know these things.
Ahh even less reason to worry then about instancing then, I did not realise it was that high a number, this was one of the starting areas if I remember right, which I would assume would mean it is also one of the smaller zones.
500 people in a zone all fighting heavily with a real time combat system probably means that this games servers can take a lot of stress.
It sounds like the only real reason then they would instance a zone is the example given in the previous link where the starting area is small so it is unlikely to provide a good gaming experience for a large amount of players.
They have already confirmed non instanced dungeons as well, which I forgot to mention in my post. I think instancing will be well used in this game to the point it does not take away from anything significant or in the case of instanced dungeons if you really do not like them theyll provide you with alternatives.
Ill just wait and see for the instance aspects of this game, but right now it does not really sound like anything that would annoy me to no end
You know, if you must do instancing there is a way that would keep immersion for me...it was something that I always like about AC.
The fact that whenever there was loading you were going through a portal...no stupid static loading screens. AC wasn't instanced, but they could still do something similar with instancing...I think it would really help to avoid breaking immersion...you still feel like your part of the world and not outside of it waiting for it to load.
Edit: Actually I guess there is still nothing you could do about multiple instances of the same area which is the main concern here, more has to do with zoning I guess...just throwing that out there even though I know it is a little off topic...sorry.
I have to disagree there. The maximum number of players is absolutely an issue. The 50 player limit in AOC is a bit ridiculous, but if the number of players an instance can support is reasonable then I don't see what the big deal is. How is it any more "immersion breaking" than having lag bring your framerate to a crawl or having the server crash?
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.
Its great if it doesnt break immersion for you, but for me, knowing there is a potential parallel universe in my MMORPG makes nearly impossible for me to immerse myself...but regarding my post you repsonded to; its not about our personal opinion about instancing, but rather a company being open about their instancing system to a new costumer (a dev post on the official forums doesnt cut it) to aviod hate threads/posts and a bad reputation. I know, for myself, I have a better chance in overcoming these obstacles if I'm prepared for them.
P.S. I see we both have played LOTRO. Did you have any lag problems with its non-instanced world? I didnt. Instancing isnt the Alpha & Omega in reducing lag.
If they can actually pull this off w/o the game degenerating into a huge lagfest then my hat's off to them.
But as it stands now, I don't believe it.
"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
Well in congested areas my computer is probably the bottleneck, so it's hard to say. But also consider that LOTRO is not as much of a real time combat game as conan and COS. I can image lag having a greater effect on gameplay in AOC and COS because of their combat systems.
I agree that companies should be forthright with information regarding instancing, but also consider that COS isn't really close to releasing and they may not have even made a final decision about it.
Anyway, I understand that you don't like instancing period, but to act like there's no difference between a game like AOC where multiple instances are the norm and another game that may just use it in cases of extreme congestion seems irrational to me.
~~~ Currently Playing ~~~
LOTRO- Guardian Wrymstrum & Lore-master Stabler on Nimrodel.
Conan- Zoltar <Angels of Death> Guardian on Stormrage.