First.. I didn't hear or get the feeling that Nilden was saying only size counts.. What I got from his post, since I did play EQ starting in 1999, was that open world dungeons/zones were more versatile in play.. Even WoW has completely changed their way of doing instanced dungeons.. When I first started playing WoW, dungeons were a decent size taking TIME to be able to complete them, such as Blackrock.. Then as each expansion came out the instanced zones became smaller and smaller.. At the time I left towards the end of the LK, those last 3 mini instances were a joke..
Now as for your comments such as saying huge dungeon mazes such as Old Seb or "the guks" are shallow is just baffling.. Getting lost in a maze dungeon is FUN, and is part of the adventure.. Sure the first few times in there you'll be overwelmed by the size and detail of it, but oh well.. That is what I paid for.. Finding the hand room in Kanor's Castle was scarey the first time or two, but far from dull..
Second comment.. I find it ironic that you speaking about being "hammered" to death about a repeating problem.. YET you excuse the modern day hammering of GEAR GRIND of repeating the same dungeon over and over a hundred times.. HELLO!!!!.. That is my problem and I know I'm not alone in that feeling.. As for the 3rd part, I would love to hear what MMO you feel has awesome instance dungeons.. I'm hoping that RIFT, TOR or WoW aren't your examples..
If that is what he was getting at, his post is incredibly biased and based on a faulty premise. He compares one of the best developed Open Worlds to one of the Worst offenders of Instances. When you do that, of course instances will look bad.
But that is still completely besides the point. His claim that Open World is more versatile and Instances are linear is completely unfounded and nonsensicle. An Openworld with only 1 entrance and 1 exit is still pretty epicly linear, no matter how big of a zone it is. An Instance where you can complete areas at any given order is versatile. If anyone inherently things that Open World is automatically versatile and instances are automatically linear clearly isn't thinking at all.
Getting lost in a maze is fun for you. Don't make a blanket statement that everyone finds that fun, because I can assure you that getting lost in a maze is enough to make me quit a game completely. Mazes are not fun in MMORPG's for me. If I wanted to solve a puzzle, I'd pick up a puzzle.
Just because you are repeating two tasks doesn't make it the same thing. I drive to school every day, that doesn't equate that to me breathing every day. People typically don't mind dungeon grinding repeatedly because it's expected to come with the territory of MMORPG. People mind having trial and error puzzles because it's typically considered lowbrow and just an obnoxious festival for both the participant and the designer.
See that part in blue... Did you just make a blanket statement? I think so.. Pot meet Kettle.. Have a nice day
So far what I have read of the thread against open-world dungeons is griefers and boss mobs being camped.
Also
- lack of tailored content
- less control over the number/level of participants
- greater chance of interference in scripted content or narrative
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
So far what I have read of the thread against open-world dungeons is griefers and boss mobs being camped.
Also
- lack of tailored content
- less control over the number/level of participants
- greater chance of interference in scripted content or narrative
What do you mean by lack of tailored content? Are you suggesting that I or my group should be able to dictate how open world zones work? Then you go on to "less control".... So you want PRIVATE game play? instead of public play.. Cause when it comes to open world zones, why should I or my group dictate how many people are allowed in Lower Guk? or The Barrens... I can only assume with the last part you just don't like the chances that someone might effect your play? I take it you don't PvP much, cause if you do, you are going to be interfered repeatively.. Ha Ha Ha.. Sounds to me you are wanting a single player console game, not an open world MMO..
The one thing i hate is the multiple server concept. I would definitely want single-server, even if it's enabled through phasing/instancing. There is just something inherently wrong with there being a whole other copy of the world that you can never travel to or meet people from. Instancing/Phasing (when well-done) is pretty transparent, so I've no issues with it. And it helps enable larger populations with limited geography without restricting your ability to meet everyone in the game.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
A strawman. No one is promoting gear grind, or farming dungeons, or bad dungeon design in general.
Instances have advantages are in:
adjustable challenge
customized content
enables the use of more profound effects without disrupting the larger world or other players
better performance
immune to some of the adverse effects in multiplayer (e.g. griefing)
It is also crucial for competitive PvP and, so far, the best PvE content in a game has always been instanced.
Can I get details on this please.. All I'm reading is a car sales commercial, with no numbers and facts..
I feel like if I started explaining it, I would be talking to deaf ears. You're not here to discuss the topic, you're here to make quips and snide comments.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
So far what I have read of the thread against open-world dungeons is griefers and boss mobs being camped.
Also
- lack of tailored content
- less control over the number/level of participants
- greater chance of interference in scripted content or narrative
What do you mean by lack of tailored content? Are you suggesting that I or my group should be able to dictate how open world zones work? Then you go on to "less control".... So you want PRIVATE game play? instead of public play.. Cause when it comes to open world zones, why should I or my group dictate how many people are allowed in Lower Guk? or The Barrens... I can only assume with the last part you just don't like the chances that someone might effect your play? I take it you don't PvP much, cause if you do, you are going to be interfered repeatively.. Ha Ha Ha.. Sounds to me you are wanting a single player console game, not an open world MMO..
As usual, you present a lot of assumptions about a person's playstyle and behavior and, as usual, it's all baseless and antagonistic. Keep up the great work, mate!
To humor you, though, and amuse myself for a few minutes, here's a better description of those for you:
- tailored content - the dungeon content can be scaled to the specific group or options can be present to allow the players to set the level of difficulty. This allows both developer and adventurers to create a more enjoyable encounter level with challenges that suit the adventuring team's interests.
- control over the number/level of participants - as mentioned in another post in this thread, when an instance is made for a specific group size, the mob content can be designed for that group size. In open world dungeons, even if content is designed for a specific group or level range, the presence of one or more groups can negatively affect the experience for some or all of the participants, either in reduction of challenge or reduction of available content.
- scripted content or narrative - While phasing is used in games such as Dragon's Prophet and WoW, it does. in its current iteration, seem clunky at times. It's definitely a work around at this stage. Instanced dungeons not only avoid that awkward team moment, but take it a step further by allowing for content that simply could not exist in an open world environment. The persistent nature of an MMO, disparity in level range and the unknown factor of what stage of the storyline players will be at when entering an area make storytelling events very difficult in the open world environment. What happens is players end up sitting around waiting for triggers or events to respawn or reset, which is an undesirable situation for both developer and adventurer.
Ryd, I get that you played EQ a lot and no one is trying to take that away from you. However in this discussion and several others your only argument is that the way EQ did things is FUN and that anyone that doesn't agree just wants to take fun away from others. You really bring nothing to the discussion, so if you are going to be here, at least get rid of the snark and attitude.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The one thing i hate is the multiple server concept. I would definitely want single-server, even if it's enabled through phasing/instancing. There is just something inherently wrong with there being a whole other copy of the world that you can never travel to or meet people from. Instancing/Phasing (when well-done) is pretty transparent, so I've no issues with it. And it helps enable larger populations with limited geography without restricting your ability to meet everyone in the game.
A lot of the eastern games lean in the single-server direction with their 'channel' system. In many of those games, there are few servers with multiple channels, where as over here in the west, we create a crapload of servers and then after six months tell everyone they have to move - the result of several that may not have ever existed with channels in place.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Quizzical Here we go again. The proper question isn't whether an MMORPG should be instanced, but how. To not use any sort of instancing whatsoever would require such wildly inefficient programming techniques that the game would surely be vaporware.
And yet every old school MMO did I without fail.
And Darkfall did it, with no loading screens, AND real time FPS combat on a massive scale.
it was a big fail in EQ1 before Kunark launched when lower guk was camped 24/7 on my server, every named had a waiting list that was hours long during peak hours. Huge fail - this would never fly today.
Darkfall is still niche - I wouldnt call it massive, 100vs100 is nothing try 500vs500 in one small area that'd be massive.
That's why you make loot random within the dungeon and named mobs either give you a greater chance at the loot dropping and or offer larger cash / crafting component rewards along with the random loot drop. On top of that, you allow shared loot and XP on mobs, both named and trash. Problem solved.
So far what I have read of the thread against open-world dungeons is griefers and boss mobs being camped.
Also
- lack of tailored content
- less control over the number/level of participants
- greater chance of interference in scripted content or narrative
What do you mean by lack of tailored content? Are you suggesting that I or my group should be able to dictate how open world zones work? Then you go on to "less control".... So you want PRIVATE game play? instead of public play.. Cause when it comes to open world zones, why should I or my group dictate how many people are allowed in Lower Guk? or The Barrens... I can only assume with the last part you just don't like the chances that someone might effect your play? I take it you don't PvP much, cause if you do, you are going to be interfered repeatively.. Ha Ha Ha.. Sounds to me you are wanting a single player console game, not an open world MMO..
As usual, you present a lot of assumptions about a person's playstyle and behavior and, as usual, it's all baseless and antagonistic. Keep up the great work, mate!
To humor you, though, and amuse myself for a few minutes, here's a better description of those for you:
- tailored content - the dungeon content can be scaled to the specific group or options can be present to allow the players to set the level of difficulty. This allows both developer and adventurers to create a more enjoyable encounter level with challenges that suit the adventuring team's interests. So basically you want the bar raised just high enough for you to clear, and nothing more. Some would consider that predictable and easy.. Sometimes (in my opinion) there needs to be NO WIN scenarios.. You go there, or do this you will DIE.. period..
- control over the number/level of participants - as mentioned in another post in this thread, when an instance is made for a specific group size, the mob content can be designed for that group size. In open world dungeons, even if content is designed for a specific group or level range, the presence of one or more groups can negatively affect the experience for some or all of the participants, either in reduction of challenge or reduction of available content. Exactly, the presence of others WILL affect your experience.. Isn't that the whole purpose of MASS MULTIPERSON ONLINE games? I want to play with the public GOOD OR BAD.. and in MY opinion, the Good far out way any Bad.. GW2 does a GREAT job as public boss fights.. Or are you not familiar with SCALING mechanic that more games are going with.. In fact using your example such as a WoW dungeon, once I'm geared, all heroics instances are a cake walk.. Any boss mob can be Scaled to party size.. So this point is moot..
- scripted content or narrative - While phasing is used in games such as Dragon's Prophet and WoW, it does. in its current iteration, seem clunky at times. It's definitely a work around at this stage. Instanced dungeons not only avoid that awkward team moment, but take it a step further by allowing for content that simply could not exist in an open world environment. ??? I assume you are talking about private storyline arcs done by using instancing.. Personally I believe storylines have no business in a true MMORPG.. So in that case there is no need to instance.. The persistent nature of an MMO, disparity in level range and the unknown factor of what stage of the storyline players will be at when entering an area make storytelling events very difficult in the open world environment. What happens is players end up sitting around waiting for triggers or events to respawn or reset, which is an undesirable situation for both developer and adventurer.Not so.. You are refering back to an old mechanic that is easily overcome, such as the cleric epic in Skyfire.. That particular boss is now triggered, not camped.. It has been that way for years.. Using an open world NPC target is very outdated.. All you have to do is make every Quest NPC triggerable without needing an instance.. Right?
Ryd, I get that you played EQ a lot and no one is trying to take that away from you. However in this discussion and several others your only argument is that the way EQ did things is FUN and that anyone that doesn't agree just wants to take fun away from others. You really bring nothing to the discussion, so if you are going to be here, at least get rid of the snark and attitude. And your stance that everything EQ did was NOT fun is different? You have your preferences.. and I have mine..... Have a great day
I won't play a game with dungeons that i have to share with other groups. I have done that back in EQ. That is not fun compared to instanced dungeons of today.
Originally posted by Quizzical Here we go again. The proper question isn't whether an MMORPG should be instanced, but how. To not use any sort of instancing whatsoever would require such wildly inefficient programming techniques that the game would surely be vaporware.
And yet every old school MMO did I without fail.
And Darkfall did it, with no loading screens, AND real time FPS combat on a massive scale.
it was a big fail in EQ1 before Kunark launched when lower guk was camped 24/7 on my server, every named had a waiting list that was hours long during peak hours. Huge fail - this would never fly today.
Darkfall is still niche - I wouldnt call it massive, 100vs100 is nothing try 500vs500 in one small area that'd be massive.
That's why you make loot random within the dungeon and named mobs either give you a greater chance at the loot dropping and or offer larger cash / crafting component rewards along with the random loot drop. On top of that, you allow shared loot and XP on mobs, both named and trash. Problem solved.
Good Point and that is one thing I really like with GW2 open world bosses.. Everyone gets some form of reward depending on level of contribution to the fight.. This way you promote social raiding without the BS of kill stealing or loot camping..
So basically you want the bar raised just high enough for you to clear, and nothing more. Some would consider that predictable and easy.. Sometimes (in my opinion) there needs to be NO WIN scenarios.. You go there, or do this you will DIE.. period..
In Age of Conan, the choices are only normal and harder. That said, the goal is to create a fun gaming experience for the players. Whether they want to mop the floor with mobs or face down a challenge unlike any other, I see no problem in giving that to them. Dungeons and Dragons Online did that very well with their level choices, expanding the per dungeon and global rewards based on the dungeons being completed.
Exactly, the presence of others WILL affect your experience.. Isn't that the whole purpose of MASS MULTIPERSON ONLINE games? I want to play with the public GOOD OR BAD.. and in MY opinion, the Good far out way any Bad.. GW2 does a GREAT job as public boss fights.. Or are you not familiar with SCALING mechanic that more games are going with.. In fact using your example such as a WoW dungeon, once I'm geared, all heroics instances are a cake walk.. Any boss mob can be Scaled to party size.. So this point is moot..
Nowhere did I say that the massive experience should be removed or that open world content shouldn't exist. Once again you are making assumptions or, worse, simply making things up.
??? I assume you are talking about private storyline arcs done by using instancing.. Personally I believe storylines have no business in a true MMORPG.. So in that case there is no need to instance..
Your assumption is wrong. I am not talking about private storyline but about interactive elements and the narrative that goes with the dungeon. The reason MMORPGs seem lacking compared to single-player CPRGs and definitely when compared to PnP RPGs is that element is extremely limited or completely absent. Basically, you can't have a cave-in behind your adventurers if the parties behind them haven't gone through there yet and the parties ahead of them already cleared it out.
Not so.. You are refering back to an old mechanic that is easily overcome, such as the cleric epic in Skyfire.. That particular boss is now triggered, not camped.. It has been that way for years.. Using an open world NPC target is very outdated.. All you have to do is make every Quest NPC triggerable without needing an instance.. Right?
Your comment on an "old mechanic" clearly indicated you do not understand the hurdles of creating content for a massively multiplayer persistent virtual world. If it was an "old mechanic that is easily overcome" then GDC would not have added a Narrative Summit to its line up, where discussions about narrative and story management in persistent state worlds is a regular topic.
And your stance that everything EQ did was NOT fun is different? You have your preferences.. and I have mine..... Have a great day
This is another example of you making up a stance and then arguing against it. Where did I say that everything EQ did wasn't fun? Where did I say that open world content wasn't fun?
Again, I am glad you're very passionate about EQ, but if you really want to discuss this further you're going to need to at least read the posts you're replying to. You've reached the point where you are simply making things up to argue against and it's unconstructive.
EDIT: cut out prev content to reduce size of post.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Hi all.. Just jumping back in to see the results of the poll and read all of your responses.. Absolutely fascinating.. Being an MMO gamer with my own thoughts and views on the subject, its hard to be neutral in the debate but really interesting to step back and listen to what others feel about the "instance vs. open" dungeon issue..
Thank you all for your votes and discussions.. Please, keep it up..
..because we're gamers, damn it!! - William Massachusetts (Log Horizon)
Originally posted by Quizzical Here we go again. The proper question isn't whether an MMORPG should be instanced, but how. To not use any sort of instancing whatsoever would require such wildly inefficient programming techniques that the game would surely be vaporware.
Funny how there are games without any instancing and they work fine....
Some early games that were coded in assembly language may well have not used any instancing whatsoever. MMORPGs, though? I'd be absolutely shocked if any were successful without any sort of instancing, as there are so many places where it is such an obvious and massive optimization.
Originally posted by Quizzical Here we go again. The proper question isn't whether an MMORPG should be instanced, but how. To not use any sort of instancing whatsoever would require such wildly inefficient programming techniques that the game would surely be vaporware.
Funny how there are games without any instancing and they work fine....
Some early games that were coded in assembly language may well have not used any instancing whatsoever. MMORPGs, though? I'd be absolutely shocked if any were successful without any sort of instancing, as there are so many places where it is such an obvious and massive optimization.
I think the OP is talking about no instatiation in the sense of a persistant world,, i.e you can have soft zone transitions or loadings but ultimately every part of the map is freely available and shares space with every player (like Eve).
Originally posted by Quizzical Here we go again. The proper question isn't whether an MMORPG should be instanced, but how. To not use any sort of instancing whatsoever would require such wildly inefficient programming techniques that the game would surely be vaporware.
And yet every old school MMO did I without fail.
Unless you are confusing instancing with zoning....which is quite possibly since so many here confuse definitions. For the record, an instance is a place where only you or your friends can enter, and when you leave the instanced is closed never to appear. A zone is an area that is always active and people can enter freely at their discretion and will remain persistent.
WoW dungeons are instanced. GW2's WvW areas are zoned (their small so easy to confuse but their zones nonetheless).
And its very easy to do everything within a zoned world but the game still remains open.
You are wildly wrong. You mention one particular type of zoning, and one particular type of instancing, but all or nearly all MMORPGs will use many other types of each that you fail to mention. Zoning is an internal coding thing, and there's nothing wrong with using zones for internal optimizations that players will never be aware of. Where zoning becomes problematic is when moving from one zone to another does things that annoy a player, such as having a loading screen.
Guild Wars 2's WvWvW areas are just as instanced as WoW's dungeons. They're just instanced in a different way, with the instances more persistent rather than being shut down shortly after the last group member leaves. If people from different servers go to WvWvW, they probably get sent to different instances of the same world.
Even what you would think of as a massive open world, single server design will still use a lot of instancing. If you go kill ten rats and the ten rats are all identical, then guess what: they're ten instances of the same thing.
Originally posted by Quizzical Even what you would think of as a massive open world, single server design will still use a lot of instancing. If you go kill ten rats and the ten rats are all identical, then guess what: they're ten instances of the same thing.
Don't split hairs to derail. We're not talking programming terms, we're talking instance as it is used in MMOs.
Originally posted by Quizzical Even what you would think of as a massive open world, single server design will still use a lot of instancing. If you go kill ten rats and the ten rats are all identical, then guess what: they're ten instances of the same thing.
Don't split hairs to derail. We're not talking programming terms, we're talking instance as it is used in MMOs.
There are many, many ways that instancing is used in MMORPGs. If you want to talk about just one particular one, then you'll need to give a very careful definition of it, which is something that most of the people who rail against instancing likely can't do. "Like what this game does and not like what that game does" is not a definition, and is so vague as to barely have any meaning at all.
Originally posted by Quizzical Even what you would think of as a massive open world, single server design will still use a lot of instancing. If you go kill ten rats and the ten rats are all identical, then guess what: they're ten instances of the same thing.
Don't split hairs to derail. We're not talking programming terms, we're talking instance as it is used in MMOs.
There are many, many ways that instancing is used in MMORPGs.
I JUST said stop splitting hairs and using computer terms just to derail this thread. You know exactly the kind of instancing we're talking about here. I'm sure I'm not the only one sick of you trying to bend things. Yes congratulations, you know basic programming.
We're talking about instanced dungeons/worlds. Now please go.
but if you really want to discuss this further you're going to need to at least read the posts you're replying to. You've reached the point where you are simply making things up to argue against and it's unconstructive.
EDIT: cut out prev content to reduce size of post.
If you want to see the world that way.. oh well.. This thread was a poll in which some of use voiced our opinions that we enjoy a public open world and it was YOU that became combative and unconstructive to people that don't support private instances.. Have a great day
Originally posted by Quizzical Even what you would think of as a massive open world, single server design will still use a lot of instancing. If you go kill ten rats and the ten rats are all identical, then guess what: they're ten instances of the same thing.
Don't split hairs to derail. We're not talking programming terms, we're talking instance as it is used in MMOs.
There are many, many ways that instancing is used in MMORPGs.
I JUST said stop splitting hairs and using computer terms just to derail this thread. You know exactly the kind of instancing we're talking about here. I'm sure I'm not the only one sick of you trying to bend things. Yes congratulations, you know basic programming.
We're talking about instanced dungeons/worlds. Now please go.
You see? You can't define what you're talking about.
In fact, I'm not sure that I can define it, either. I think it has something to do with the difference between a private instance of a portion of the game world that only one player or those invited by that one player can enter, as opposed to a public instance that everyone can enter if so inclined (though perhaps not all at once). And I also think it has something to do with the difference between instances of portions of the game world that stay up indefinitely (excluding server maintenance) and those that are designed to close after a while and not reopen. But even that is far from a definition.
but if you really want to discuss this further you're going to need to at least read the posts you're replying to. You've reached the point where you are simply making things up to argue against and it's unconstructive.
EDIT: cut out prev content to reduce size of post.
If you want to see the world that way.. oh well.. This thread was a poll in which some of use voiced our opinions that we enjoy a public open world and it was YOU that became combative and unconstructive to people that don't support private instances.. Have a great day
Loktofeit definitely know a bit more than you about MMOs since he actually works on one, and not a minor one either, but the most successful sandbox MMO to date. And I agree with him, try to read the posts you answer to and also answer to the points made instead of making massive assumptions about how other people play the games.
Did you really play that card? The old "I work for one" card.. As if any of us actually care.. There are thousands of devs across the world that believe the game they are working on is the best.. Obviously that isn't so.. I'm sure Chevy sales persons feel that Chevy is the best.. Again you and Lok are arguing over OPINIONS and making assumptions yourself.. Have a great day ..
My biggest problem with dungeons is that in every single game I've played they look like boring black caves with gloomy monsters. After 10+ runs you're starting to hate this doom and gloom. My eyes need landscape variety.
If that is what he was getting at, his post is incredibly biased and based on a faulty premise. He compares one of the best developed Open Worlds to one of the Worst offenders of Instances. When you do that, of course instances will look bad.
But that is still completely besides the point. His claim that Open World is more versatile and Instances are linear is completely unfounded and nonsensicle. An Openworld with only 1 entrance and 1 exit is still pretty epicly linear, no matter how big of a zone it is. An Instance where you can complete areas at any given order is versatile. If anyone inherently things that Open World is automatically versatile and instances are automatically linear clearly isn't thinking at all.
Getting lost in a maze is fun for you. Don't make a blanket statement that everyone finds that fun, because I can assure you that getting lost in a maze is enough to make me quit a game completely. Mazes are not fun in MMORPG's for me. If I wanted to solve a puzzle, I'd pick up a puzzle.
Just because you are repeating two tasks doesn't make it the same thing. I drive to school every day, that doesn't equate that to me breathing every day. People typically don't mind dungeon grinding repeatedly because it's expected to come with the territory of MMORPG. People mind having trial and error puzzles because it's typically considered lowbrow and just an obnoxious festival for both the participant and the designer.
Faulty premise? Everquest is the best developed open world and WoW is the worst offender for instances? The only one here being completly unfounded and nonsensicle here is you. I linked maps for Everquest Sebilis and Burning Crusade because they were both the second expansions for the respective games and you can clearly see by comparing dungeon maps the difference. I then for dramatic effect added the FPS design image. You should also make a sign that says "Dungeons should not have puzzles or mazes." That's a really great design idea right there /SARCASM<---
Are you seriously trying to argue that a small instanced hallway is better than a large open maze when it comes to dungeon design?
Oh please, every point in this argument has devolved to "EQ has the best Open World ever" and "WoW has the worst Instance design ever". If you think that I'm being nonsensical in assuming that the general community doesn consider WoW to be the worst offender when it comes to instances then I don't know what you are thinking. It's hip to hate on WoW, and everyone will parade the notion that WoW was pretty much the worst offender for everything. Likewise, there are a lot of die hard EQ fans on this forum. I've been here for 2 weeks and I already got that vibe ridiculously strong.
You really missed my point. Just because YOU like puzzles doesn't mean EVERYONE wants puzzles in their RPG game. You can't make a blanket statement like that. And besides just because something is designed well doesn't mean it fits in every genre. Puzzles don't always fit in hack and slashes and FPS. Platforming doesn't fit in RPG'S and RTS. Character progression doesn't fit into Fighting games.
Comments
See that part in blue... Did you just make a blanket statement? I think so.. Pot meet Kettle..
Have a nice day
Also
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What do you mean by lack of tailored content? Are you suggesting that I or my group should be able to dictate how open world zones work? Then you go on to "less control".... So you want PRIVATE game play? instead of public play.. Cause when it comes to open world zones, why should I or my group dictate how many people are allowed in Lower Guk? or The Barrens... I can only assume with the last part you just don't like the chances that someone might effect your play? I take it you don't PvP much, cause if you do, you are going to be interfered repeatively.. Ha Ha Ha.. Sounds to me you are wanting a single player console game, not an open world MMO..
Both.
The one thing i hate is the multiple server concept. I would definitely want single-server, even if it's enabled through phasing/instancing. There is just something inherently wrong with there being a whole other copy of the world that you can never travel to or meet people from. Instancing/Phasing (when well-done) is pretty transparent, so I've no issues with it. And it helps enable larger populations with limited geography without restricting your ability to meet everyone in the game.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
I feel like if I started explaining it, I would be talking to deaf ears. You're not here to discuss the topic, you're here to make quips and snide comments.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
As usual, you present a lot of assumptions about a person's playstyle and behavior and, as usual, it's all baseless and antagonistic. Keep up the great work, mate!
To humor you, though, and amuse myself for a few minutes, here's a better description of those for you:
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
A lot of the eastern games lean in the single-server direction with their 'channel' system. In many of those games, there are few servers with multiple channels, where as over here in the west, we create a crapload of servers and then after six months tell everyone they have to move - the result of several that may not have ever existed with channels in place.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
That's why you make loot random within the dungeon and named mobs either give you a greater chance at the loot dropping and or offer larger cash / crafting component rewards along with the random loot drop. On top of that, you allow shared loot and XP on mobs, both named and trash. Problem solved.
Instances.
I won't play a game with dungeons that i have to share with other groups. I have done that back in EQ. That is not fun compared to instanced dungeons of today.
RPG is about small group adventures anyway.
Good Point and that is one thing I really like with GW2 open world bosses.. Everyone gets some form of reward depending on level of contribution to the fight.. This way you promote social raiding without the BS of kill stealing or loot camping..
To address each of your points in order:
So basically you want the bar raised just high enough for you to clear, and nothing more. Some would consider that predictable and easy.. Sometimes (in my opinion) there needs to be NO WIN scenarios.. You go there, or do this you will DIE.. period..
In Age of Conan, the choices are only normal and harder. That said, the goal is to create a fun gaming experience for the players. Whether they want to mop the floor with mobs or face down a challenge unlike any other, I see no problem in giving that to them. Dungeons and Dragons Online did that very well with their level choices, expanding the per dungeon and global rewards based on the dungeons being completed.
Exactly, the presence of others WILL affect your experience.. Isn't that the whole purpose of MASS MULTIPERSON ONLINE games? I want to play with the public GOOD OR BAD.. and in MY opinion, the Good far out way any Bad.. GW2 does a GREAT job as public boss fights.. Or are you not familiar with SCALING mechanic that more games are going with.. In fact using your example such as a WoW dungeon, once I'm geared, all heroics instances are a cake walk.. Any boss mob can be Scaled to party size.. So this point is moot..
Nowhere did I say that the massive experience should be removed or that open world content shouldn't exist. Once again you are making assumptions or, worse, simply making things up.
??? I assume you are talking about private storyline arcs done by using instancing.. Personally I believe storylines have no business in a true MMORPG.. So in that case there is no need to instance..
Your assumption is wrong. I am not talking about private storyline but about interactive elements and the narrative that goes with the dungeon. The reason MMORPGs seem lacking compared to single-player CPRGs and definitely when compared to PnP RPGs is that element is extremely limited or completely absent. Basically, you can't have a cave-in behind your adventurers if the parties behind them haven't gone through there yet and the parties ahead of them already cleared it out.
Not so.. You are refering back to an old mechanic that is easily overcome, such as the cleric epic in Skyfire.. That particular boss is now triggered, not camped.. It has been that way for years.. Using an open world NPC target is very outdated.. All you have to do is make every Quest NPC triggerable without needing an instance.. Right?
Your comment on an "old mechanic" clearly indicated you do not understand the hurdles of creating content for a massively multiplayer persistent virtual world. If it was an "old mechanic that is easily overcome" then GDC would not have added a Narrative Summit to its line up, where discussions about narrative and story management in persistent state worlds is a regular topic.
And your stance that everything EQ did was NOT fun is different? You have your preferences.. and I have mine..... Have a great day
This is another example of you making up a stance and then arguing against it. Where did I say that everything EQ did wasn't fun? Where did I say that open world content wasn't fun?
Again, I am glad you're very passionate about EQ, but if you really want to discuss this further you're going to need to at least read the posts you're replying to. You've reached the point where you are simply making things up to argue against and it's unconstructive.
EDIT: cut out prev content to reduce size of post.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Hi all.. Just jumping back in to see the results of the poll and read all of your responses.. Absolutely fascinating.. Being an MMO gamer with my own thoughts and views on the subject, its hard to be neutral in the debate but really interesting to step back and listen to what others feel about the "instance vs. open" dungeon issue..
Thank you all for your votes and discussions.. Please, keep it up..
..because we're gamers, damn it!! - William Massachusetts (Log Horizon)
Some early games that were coded in assembly language may well have not used any instancing whatsoever. MMORPGs, though? I'd be absolutely shocked if any were successful without any sort of instancing, as there are so many places where it is such an obvious and massive optimization.
I think the OP is talking about no instatiation in the sense of a persistant world,, i.e you can have soft zone transitions or loadings but ultimately every part of the map is freely available and shares space with every player (like Eve).
You are wildly wrong. You mention one particular type of zoning, and one particular type of instancing, but all or nearly all MMORPGs will use many other types of each that you fail to mention. Zoning is an internal coding thing, and there's nothing wrong with using zones for internal optimizations that players will never be aware of. Where zoning becomes problematic is when moving from one zone to another does things that annoy a player, such as having a loading screen.
Guild Wars 2's WvWvW areas are just as instanced as WoW's dungeons. They're just instanced in a different way, with the instances more persistent rather than being shut down shortly after the last group member leaves. If people from different servers go to WvWvW, they probably get sent to different instances of the same world.
Don't split hairs to derail. We're not talking programming terms, we're talking instance as it is used in MMOs.
There are many, many ways that instancing is used in MMORPGs. If you want to talk about just one particular one, then you'll need to give a very careful definition of it, which is something that most of the people who rail against instancing likely can't do. "Like what this game does and not like what that game does" is not a definition, and is so vague as to barely have any meaning at all.
I JUST said stop splitting hairs and using computer terms just to derail this thread. You know exactly the kind of instancing we're talking about here. I'm sure I'm not the only one sick of you trying to bend things. Yes congratulations, you know basic programming.
We're talking about instanced dungeons/worlds. Now please go.
If you want to see the world that way.. oh well.. This thread was a poll in which some of use voiced our opinions that we enjoy a public open world and it was YOU that became combative and unconstructive to people that don't support private instances.. Have a great day
You see? You can't define what you're talking about.
In fact, I'm not sure that I can define it, either. I think it has something to do with the difference between a private instance of a portion of the game world that only one player or those invited by that one player can enter, as opposed to a public instance that everyone can enter if so inclined (though perhaps not all at once). And I also think it has something to do with the difference between instances of portions of the game world that stay up indefinitely (excluding server maintenance) and those that are designed to close after a while and not reopen. But even that is far from a definition.
Did you really play that card? The old "I work for one" card.. As if any of us actually care.. There are thousands of devs across the world that believe the game they are working on is the best.. Obviously that isn't so.. I'm sure Chevy sales persons feel that Chevy is the best.. Again you and Lok are arguing over OPINIONS and making assumptions yourself.. Have a great day ..
My biggest problem with dungeons is that in every single game I've played they look like boring black caves with gloomy monsters. After 10+ runs you're starting to hate this doom and gloom. My eyes need landscape variety.
Oh please, every point in this argument has devolved to "EQ has the best Open World ever" and "WoW has the worst Instance design ever". If you think that I'm being nonsensical in assuming that the general community doesn consider WoW to be the worst offender when it comes to instances then I don't know what you are thinking. It's hip to hate on WoW, and everyone will parade the notion that WoW was pretty much the worst offender for everything. Likewise, there are a lot of die hard EQ fans on this forum. I've been here for 2 weeks and I already got that vibe ridiculously strong.
You really missed my point. Just because YOU like puzzles doesn't mean EVERYONE wants puzzles in their RPG game. You can't make a blanket statement like that. And besides just because something is designed well doesn't mean it fits in every genre. Puzzles don't always fit in hack and slashes and FPS. Platforming doesn't fit in RPG'S and RTS. Character progression doesn't fit into Fighting games.