Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

So what is so bad about instancing?

1235»

Comments

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by MikeJT
    Perhaps games need to start involving quests of truly epic proportions. You might not be the hero who slayed the monster, but you might be a part of the army that slayed the monster, or the army that defended the castle from the army of undead. You need to make sure that there is a truly epic and urgent task that is ongoing and allows players from all levels and from all classes and skill focuses to participate.
    You can't just do a WoW and say there's a force of good and a force of evil and they're at war with each other but have no front line and nothing that ever changes.
    A truly persistant world with open PvP (or atleast faction vs faction PvP) would certainly keep players on their toes and involved in the war effort, and probably generate enough content all by itself.



     

    The problem with that is that when people watch Lord of the Rings they don't typically say:

    "Remember the battle with tens of thousand of soldiers?  I wish I was one of the nameless soldiers in that battle.  One of those guys who barely changed the course of battle at all."

    They usually say:

    "I wish I was Gimli, Legolas, or Strider, part of the fellowship that saves the world!"

    It's not good for a game designer to say "You'll be a nameless nobody in my game and like it."  It's much better for them to figure out ways to make each player be the hero they want to be.

    Massive PVP battles can be fun (Planetside) but a minority of gamers like that type of gameplay.  A larger chunk of players want to be the hero.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • PatchDayPatchDay Member Posts: 1,641
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Originally posted by MikeJT
    Perhaps games need to start involving quests of truly epic proportions. You might not be the hero who slayed the monster, but you might be a part of the army that slayed the monster, or the army that defended the castle from the army of undead. You need to make sure that there is a truly epic and urgent task that is ongoing and allows players from all levels and from all classes and skill focuses to participate.
    You can't just do a WoW and say there's a force of good and a force of evil and they're at war with each other but have no front line and nothing that ever changes.
    A truly persistant world with open PvP (or atleast faction vs faction PvP) would certainly keep players on their toes and involved in the war effort, and probably generate enough content all by itself.



     

    The problem with that is that when people watch Lord of the Rings they don't typically say:

    "Remember the battle with tens of thousand of soldiers?  I wish I was one of the nameless soldiers in that battle.  One of those guys who barely changed the course of battle at all."

    They usually say:

    "I wish I was Gimli, Legolas, or Strider, part of the fellowship that saves the world!"

    It's not good for a game designer to say "You'll be a nameless nobody in my game and like it."  It's much better for them to figure out ways to make each player be the hero they want to be.

    Massive PVP battles can be fun (Planetside) but a minority of gamers like that type of gameplay.  A larger chunk of players want to be the hero.

     

    Wrong, players take pride in working together with others and accomplishing a goal. Take a look at at the hundreds of players in a fleet that accomplishes something for their Alliance in EVE Online. I take pride in working together with other players and making a difference

    Designers need to take their head out of their butt and stop designing MMOs like they are for single player gamers. It's not about just -YOU- its about the community, guild, or group (party).

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by PatchDay
    Wrong, players take pride in working together with others and accomplishing a goal. Take a look at at the hundreds of players in a fleet that accomplishes something for their Alliance in EVE Online. I take pride in working together with other players and making a difference
    Designers need to take their head out of their butt and stop designing MMOs like they are for single player gamers. It's not about just -YOU- its about the community, guild, or group (party).



     

    I don't know how to respond to posts like this.

    The successful games out there embrace the formula.  They try to make the player feel like a hero.

    Furthermore, fellowship means grouping, not soloing.  Although players would still prefer to be a lone action hero than to be a meaningless nobody in a huge faceless army.

    Sandbox MMOs fail to elevate your character's importance to the same magnitude of Themepark MMOs.  This is one of many factors behind why Themepark MMOs are more successful.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • FreddyNoNoseFreddyNoNose Member Posts: 1,558
    Originally posted by JGMIII

    Originally posted by Josher

    Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

    Originally posted by lornphoenix



    Where WoW Gets it wrong is in PvP.

    Battlegrounds and Arenas has killed any kinda of real World PvP.
     

    Not seeing the problem, frankly. Open World PvP is only fun when the numbers and levels are close to even. WoW's open PvP is a gank-fest.



     

    Open PvP in EVERY MMO is a gank fest.  Don't single out WOW=)  Nailing someone when they're not ready or outnumbering them is what open PvP is all about.   Thats the whole point.   Finding a fair fight in WOW to UO to EVE is completely contrary to whole point of being able to attack people whenever you want.  The easiest way to win is to make that possibility a certainty.  SO you attack them when they're about dead, crossing a gate or whenever it makes winning the easiest.   If anyone says Open world PvP is about fair fights, they're living in fantasy land.  Thats what battlegrounds, arenas and instancing is for...to balance the encounter.  Open PvP is NEVER about even numbers if people have control.  Its about easily winning and ganking or zerging is the easiest way to win.  Thats why instanced PvP is more fair, more balanced and promotes BETTER competition and a major reason newer MMOs are offering that sort of play.

    I enjoy open PvP.  I actually do wait to have fair fights if I can, because if I already know the outcome, its just not fun.  I hate gankers, but thats what you get;)

    World pvp is not about being fair, its using the lay of the land, your skills scouting out a situation and attacking at the best possible moment. World pvp could be massive 1000 v 1000 or just a small skirmish. Do people get ganked? yes

    As they said in UO and now In Eve if your fighting a fair fight you did something wrong.

    While instanced pvp is "fair" numbers wise its totally unrealistic and takes alot of pvp players immersion away.

    Do I enjoy a game or two of king of the hill in a instance? sure. Do I prefer survival of the fittest and using my head out in the open more? fuck yeah!!! be smarter and you wont get ganked.



     

    Players choose if they are immersed or not.  They know it is a computer game and at some point they choose to be immersed or not. 

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    Originally posted by FreddyNoNose
    Players choose if they are immersed or not.  They know it is a computer game and at some point they choose to be immersed or not. 



     

    Immersion doesn't enter into it.

    Instanced PVP is fun competition.

    World PVP is uninteresting ganking.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • NarugNarug Member UncommonPosts: 756

    Someone mentioned Asheron's Call. I never played the first one but did have the honor of playing Asheron's Call 2. I also don't have the honor of returning to my first home. The last game I truly felt like an explorer.

    I have no problem with instancing or an open world. My problem comes with the world feeling small instead of it being big. I want large worlds and long travel times.

    When entering a underground kingdom/area I want to feel like I'm entering one.

    Duskwood's Raven Hill Cemetery in WoW and EQ2's Desert of Flames expansion area, Desert of Ro, are two areas where at least I feel like I'm ascending/descending an objective.

    I don't like entering the city of Neriak on just the same level of ground. Especially when the inside looks like an underground city. (I know a cave like area but still looks like an Underdark)

    I think what I'm trying to say here is there needs to be a feeling of a underworld below you and a overworld you're living on.

    (I've actually felt this in the single player strategy games Heroes of Might & Magic 3+ and D&D Dragonshard)

    There also needs to be more surprises and more chances to stumble on hidden cultures. More chances to feel like an archeologist.

    MMOs are doing a good job on providing books in game to read, study the in game lore, and rewarding explorer based achievements so at least they're attempting that direction.

    AC2 Player RIP Final Death Jan 31st 2017

    Refugee of Auberean

    Refugee of Dereth

  • CHATTERCHATTER Member Posts: 44
    Originally posted by zantax


    I hate instancing, I will agree with many people here that it detracts from the immersive world that you want to be a part of.  There are more creative ways to handle people in one place then simply spawning a new version of that same place.  Competition is gone this way as well, and I really think that instances are more of a way to make the games less difficult then they used to be.  Yea you read that right instances IMO make games less difficult then they once were.
    You might be asking how I came up with that last statment, well it is simple, look at WOW alot of people cried that the game was to difficult because they couldn't compete in 40 man raids to get the "uber" equipment, so they made them easier to attain.  When in reality making it a challenge in some way to get that "uber" equipment is what the game is supposed to be otherwise we are all just playing CounterStrike.  You might as well give everyone everything and never have the ultra uber people out there that can show off there "Uber" weapons.  Back in the day I remember hearing about people in EQ waiting for a creature to spawn for hours and hours on end just to have that chance of getting the kill so they can get that one item they want, then having a group show up at the wrong time and the creature spawns and the group kills it before that one guy can and poof he looses out on that item.  Most people now adays would scream blood blue murder if this was the mechanic in MMO's but in reality it was things like that, that showed others on the server who wanted to put the time in to get the truely "Epic" items.  Asheron's Call was the one I played back when EQ was out and they never had any instancing.  If you went to the BDC (I think it was called) you competed with everyone else for the 3 Noble Olthoi that were in the dungeon, if you were the one that killed them you got great loot and possibly the best of something.  Was it instanced?  Nope, everyone was in the same dungeon and everyone competed for the same kills, was it fair, Yes because everyone had the ability to get there and try and kill things just like everyone else.  AC delt with this in a different way, they gave you content so you could go do other things, and achieve close to the best things in the game.  If to many people gathered in town there would be a random portal storm and you would be found teleported out of town running for your life from some critter.  To me the world not having any places I can't get to or see is not a world I wish to be a part of, maybe that is why I am not playing most of the new MMO's out there.

     

    While I don't like instancing, it's not for that reason.  I don't like it because it doesn't feel massively multiplayer then.

     

    If they had an instance w/ a cap of 500 that I would be OK with.  But a low cap like 75 or 100; even 200 is pushing it.  (assuming its a regular zone).

     

    I want to be able to see people walking around, running to missions/quests, at the same stores i walk into doing business, etc...

     

    Also, I completely disagree w/ your vision of what a MMO should be.

    I'm guessing the reason you want to keep those things is because they are what you did and you dont want to feel like you wasted your time.  But i have BAD news for you.

     

    * All MMOs die.  Everything you grinded so hard for to feel elite will vanish into thin air and you will have nothign to show for it.

    * Nobody cares about your "Uber" stuff except you.  People aren't admiring you no matter what you think.

    * MMOs should be about the act of playing, not the act of waiting to play.

  • VhalnVhaln Member Posts: 3,159
    Originally posted by PatchDay
     
    Wrong, players take pride in working together with others and accomplishing a goal. Take a look at at the hundreds of players in a fleet that accomplishes something for their Alliance in EVE Online. I take pride in working together with other players and making a difference
    Designers need to take their head out of their butt and stop designing MMOs like they are for single player gamers. It's not about just -YOU- its about the community, guild, or group (party).

     

    I agree.  When I play an MMO, I want to be part of the gameworld, the community, etc.  When I want to be a hero, I play a single-player game. 

    When MMOs try to make me feel a hero, it just makes me feel like they're insulting my intelligence.  I won't feel like a hero, it'll just feel like an absurdly thin illusion, in a world I'm not actually having any impact on at all.  I'd rather have the tiny impact of a single soldier in an army, than no impact at all, as a hero in my own personal delusion.

    When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.

  • cybertruckercybertrucker Member UncommonPosts: 1,117


     
     
     
    Also, I completely disagree w/ your vision of what a MMO should be.
    I'm guessing the reason you want to keep those things is because they are what you did and you dont want to feel like you wasted your time.  But i have BAD news for you.
     
    * All MMOs die.  Everything you grinded so hard for to feel elite will vanish into thin air and you will have nothign to show for it.
    * Nobody cares about your "Uber" stuff except you.  People aren't admiring you no matter what you think.
    * MMOs should be about the act of playing, not the act of waiting to play.



     

    I have to say I think your wrong about the part that people arent admiring you... I remember back in EQ1 apparantly a game yo umust not have played.. and when say EPICS were first put into the game.. and you saw someone that had one  you would drool over it. Todays games are so bogged down with worthless items because they are so easy to aquire no one cares. But back in the day when you saw someone holding an item that was hard to come by due to long spawn timers or very hard raids you actually be like WOW great job on getting that.. and that my friend is admiration in its on right.

  • CHATTERCHATTER Member Posts: 44
    Originally posted by cybertrucker



     
     
     
    Also, I completely disagree w/ your vision of what a MMO should be.
    I'm guessing the reason you want to keep those things is because they are what you did and you dont want to feel like you wasted your time.  But i have BAD news for you.
     
    * All MMOs die.  Everything you grinded so hard for to feel elite will vanish into thin air and you will have nothign to show for it.
    * Nobody cares about your "Uber" stuff except you.  People aren't admiring you no matter what you think.
    * MMOs should be about the act of playing, not the act of waiting to play.



     

    I have to say I think your wrong about the part that people arent admiring you... I remember back in EQ1 apparantly a game yo umust not have played.. and when say EPICS were first put into the game.. and you saw someone that had one  you would drool over it. Todays games are so bogged down with worthless items because they are so easy to aquire no one cares. But back in the day when you saw someone holding an item that was hard to come by due to long spawn timers or very hard raids you actually be like WOW great job on getting that.. and that my friend is admiration in its on right.

    Yes, but you have to be the type of person who would go to that extreme of an effort/time sink to find an admireable quality in someone else who does that.

    Most people won't do that.  So they find it curious.  For example, I may ask someone where they got something I haven't seen before, and say "cool.  nice going." or something like that.  But i'm just being polite because they answered me.  Not because i'm jealous or salivating at the thought of their 'phat lewt'.  Just because i'm not a douche. :p

  • samfsamf Member Posts: 19

    Instancing is bad because it eliminates the potential for PVP or any kind of dynamic gameplay. You just get the exact same thing over and over every time you run the instance.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    Originally posted by samf


    Instancing is bad because it eliminates the potential for PVP or any kind of dynamic gameplay. You just get the exact same thing over and over every time you run the instance.

     

    Hmm .. there is no PvP in many PvE games (or portion of the game) anyway or that is moot.

  • hembothembot Member Posts: 14
    Originally posted by PatchDay

    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Originally posted by MikeJT
    Perhaps games need to start involving quests of truly epic proportions. You might not be the hero who slayed the monster, but you might be a part of the army that slayed the monster, or the army that defended the castle from the army of undead. You need to make sure that there is a truly epic and urgent task that is ongoing and allows players from all levels and from all classes and skill focuses to participate.
    You can't just do a WoW and say there's a force of good and a force of evil and they're at war with each other but have no front line and nothing that ever changes.
    A truly persistant world with open PvP (or atleast faction vs faction PvP) would certainly keep players on their toes and involved in the war effort, and probably generate enough content all by itself.



     

    The problem with that is that when people watch Lord of the Rings they don't typically say:

    "Remember the battle with tens of thousand of soldiers?  I wish I was one of the nameless soldiers in that battle.  One of those guys who barely changed the course of battle at all."

    They usually say:

    "I wish I was Gimli, Legolas, or Strider, part of the fellowship that saves the world!"

    It's not good for a game designer to say "You'll be a nameless nobody in my game and like it."  It's much better for them to figure out ways to make each player be the hero they want to be.

    Massive PVP battles can be fun (Planetside) but a minority of gamers like that type of gameplay.  A larger chunk of players want to be the hero.

     

    Wrong, players take pride in working together with others and accomplishing a goal. Take a look at at the hundreds of players in a fleet that accomplishes something for their Alliance in EVE Online. I take pride in working together with other players and making a difference

    Designers need to take their head out of their butt and stop designing MMOs like they are for single player gamers. It's not about just -YOU- its about the community, guild, or group (party).



     

    I actually agree with Axehilt. Most players in an RPG (not all) prefer to be the hero/main character. Even if you're a guild or group you're still progressing through the game/story together in spite of what other people are doing. In most RPG's these people are progressing through the same story(s), but everyone is able to interact and have fun together.

    Having played EvE I know that I always held my corp mates above allies and most of the time we did things as a corp. We worked towards a common goal but I was primarily skilling up my guy and they were skilling up theirs. We expanded the scope to a few people (corp) and later established ourselves in wars (with alliances) for territory control.

    The real difference imo is that if you have a "hero" type game, you need to have tons of pre-scripted content. If you have a "soldier" type game, then you need dynamic settings.

    Instances can be a great way to achieve a smaller dynamic setting via PvE or PvP. In terms of PvE you can have wonderfully scripted battles such as in WoW that are gauged to a specific difficulty. In PvP it's really more about a level playing field, and short-term objective based combat.

    I think instances are great if they're added to the game properly. For my taste many games either over instance (DDO) or place to much emphasis on long term objectives in instances (WAR).

    Needless to say, to create an immersive world instancing is also much easier since all people in the instance can experience things such as boss fights / key battles according to lore from start to finish. Whereas creating an open world immersive experience is ten times more difficult. Those who pull it off (CCP, Blizz, the guys who did Planetside) etc. generall do seem to make the most popular/longstanding games.

     

     

     

     

Sign In or Register to comment.