Yeah well, I don't think any random clan should be able to obtain the best items and kill the best bosses, that's why there will be certain peculiar dungeons for smaller/weaker guilds. Anyways, in L2, bosses like Frintezza were limited in numbers and the pvps pre-boss became way more even, that's what I expect for Aion.
Again, these comments come from really old interviews and Im yet to see how the final bosses will be handled, it might have changed these years.
They already adressed the Raid bosses enviroments, they are following the L2 formula afaik. There is a spawn time and once the boss spawns, you can enter the lair, after some minutes waiting the boss appears and the doors get closed. That worked relatively well in L2 due to the massive pvps created from those pre-boss hours. There are a lot of bosses in open world enviroment also.
Please elaborate I did not play L2. can every guild enter an instanced lair to fight the same boss?
Its a bitt offtopic, but because you ask
No, L2 was not instanced (i don't know with Gracia update, i left the game before it) it got just zoned dungeons for the main bosses. Just one boss to kill, and as have been said by Ephimero once the group is inside doors get closed and if the group kill the boss, there is no other way that wait till next respawn (a week for some bosses). As have been said by Ephimero too, it promotes massive PvP battles out of the dungeon to gain the access to it. Opposite at what you think it was promoting zerg , because just the most powerfull clans have opportunities to win the access to the dungeons and any raid bosses in general.
........... The zerg guild part of this disturbs me. I hate zerg guilds. Sadly if aion supports zerg guilds I will not be playing it long no matter how much I like it. If a guild of 60ish or so cant compete to get to fight any major boss in game because a guild of 100-500 people can PvP and sucessfully block off other guilds well than Id rather not play because zerging takes no skill. Sad thing is Aion is my last hope. I see no game worth playing after Aion
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
I don't know if this passes as being different, Aion does have a 3rd faction mediator, the Balaur, which their main role is to place a handicap on zerglings. Of course, we have yet to see how effective they are...
I forgot where I read this, but they're trying to implement a new type of instancing. Maybe we should just wait and see...
"When you're born you're naked, when you die you're naked again, and in-between all we do is work, eat, and play MMOs." ~Forum Warrior #141
I don't know if this passes as being different, Aion does have a 3rd faction mediator, the Balaur, which their main role is to place a handicap on zerglings. Of course, we have yet to see how effective they are...
I forgot where I read this, but they're trying to implement a new type of instancing. Maybe we should just wait and see...
Ya I agree we should just wait and see. There is really no other option.
In general I have an idea on how to stop zerglings. It really is quite simple. First the Devs need to decide on how many people a guild needs to be sucesfull in the game. When a guild exceeds that number a debuff gets placed on all its members. The higher number of guild members a guild gets past the set number, the stronger the debuff. Since zerglings like to zerg let em, but when their by themselves there going to be easy prey. If they choose to roll in packs wherever they go thats cool, because thats the style they choose to play. Make em roll in packs or not zerg its that simple.
Edit: This aslo help keeps the difficulty in boss fights
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
As long as they dont do what guildwars did i am happy. Guildwars failed epicly as a MMO for me simply because it had like 20+ instances of the same city, and there was 0 open world player interaction except for a party. Had great PVP and story though. Was more like a single player campaign + multiplayer pvp
Does everyone remember what a huge step forward instancing was when it was introduced? There are just some places that need to be instanced.
Does everyone remember what a huge step backward instancing was when it was
introduced?
There are just no places that need to be instanced.
Corrected.
I honestly sometimes wonder if these boards are full of griefers who are angry that devs don't like having them in their game.
Sometimes I know that's the case. This is one of the latter times...
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
Does everyone remember what a huge step forward instancing was when it was introduced? There are just some places that need to be instanced.
Does everyone remember what a huge step backward instancing was when it was
introduced?
There are just no places that need to be instanced.
Corrected.
I honestly sometimes wonder if these boards are full of griefers who are angry that devs don't like having them in their game.
Sometimes I know that's the case. This is one of the latter times...
I'm going to have to jump in here and step to his defense. Every MMO player I know hates instances. Instances are the exact opposite of what an MMO game is supposed to be.
MMO games are supposed to be massively multiplayer. The entire point of them is to allow thousands of players to interact with each other. Instances seperate the players from each other and this is counter to the entire idea behind an MMO game.
With no disrespect intended, it sounds more like you are some sort of extreme carebear who is upset because devs aren't making all games instanced and allowing you to safely play only with your closest friends without the risk of having to interact with other players. This interaction is what people like about MMO games and if it doesn't suit you than perhaps you should consider some other style of gaming that is more controlled and predictable.
With no disrespect intended, it sounds more like you are some sort of extreme carebear who is upset because devs aren't making all games instanced and allowing you to safely play only with your closest friends without the risk of having to interact with other players. This interaction is what people like about MMO games and if it doesn't suit you than perhaps you should consider some other style of gaming that is more controlled and predictable.
The problem with this statement is you are not looking at the entire picture but only what you don't like.
Instances have their place, the problem we are seeing now is that they are far too over used. It's like giving a 16 year old booze, you can bet he'll run with it and get hammered. As much as he can. Intances were shiny and new, so let's use them everywhere!!
No that's a terrible idea I think we can all agree on that. However there are times and certain content that would not be in game at all if instances were not used. I'm thinking of times were there are cutscenes and major story arcs involved. There you are watching something really cool or important to the story develop and someone comes around to attack you.... And this keeps happening so you never get a moment's peace to watch the damn movie.
In that case, please give me an instance. Now in game where there are no movies and great big dialogues, then sure no instances make sense, and as I said no uber lootz either. I kinda like the new EQ2 idea where instead of a piece of equipment or weapon you get a trinket or ticket that you take to a vendor/trader and actually pick the uber piece you want. Still remains to be seen how it works out.
I agree with the poster above me, but I believe instances have their place, not only in story scenerios, but in certain kinds of dungeons, as well. But I'm a firm believer in the idea that the WORLD itself needs to be open, with no real barriers except the typical environment.
And why would I want to be occupied with a character for years? Seriously. A game is only that; a game. Come home from work, play for a few hours, relax and let off steam, chat with some friends, then you log off and go take care of real life things and who knows, maybe even enjoy time with people you can actually touch. A game should not take commitment just to be "mediocre" and years of my life to be "great", because eventually that game is going to end. The servers will die, people will move on, the creators will make a new game, and you will have wasted a part of your life on something that doesn't even matter.
If that's how you want to waste your life then by all means, but don't push that on the rest of us.
I think the better way to have said it is that in a good MMO, you can potentially play the same character for years and never run out of things to do, or goals to achieve.
If you *choose* to play the game over the course of a few years, what's wrong with that? How is it any worse than, say, going golfing, sitting in front of the TV, or going to the bar to blow a bunch of cash on alcohol... or whatever else?
You've got a rather narrow-minded perspective, IMO.
Also, MMOs have often been regarded by industry folk not as mere "games" but as "persistant virtual worlds". Also, that they're not merely games, but a service.
MMOs were conceived, from the start, to be a means of entertainment that could keep a player occupied and entertained for years. This is why the concept of an end-game a genre that is, by design, not supposed to have an ending seems so ridiculous to many.
This is also why you'll see people who've been playing EQ, UO, AO and various others even years after they started. Because their chosen one has continued to provide them entertainment.
What, exactly, is wrong with that?
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I agree with him 100% major content shoud not be instanced. (I said that earlier in a post). Its an MMO not a single player game. Only your personal story quests needs instanced because like he said you dont want others interupting that. Instancing is a cheep easy way out to make the game easier, and allows for less content.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore) Now Playing: N/A Worst MMO: FFXIV Favorite MMO: FFXI
Originally posted by SoSilencer I'm going to have to jump in here and step to his defense. Every MMO player I know hates instances. Instances are the exact opposite of what an MMO game is supposed to be. MMO games are supposed to be massively multiplayer. The entire point of them is to allow thousands of players to interact with each other. Instances seperate the players from each other and this is counter to the entire idea behind an MMO game. With no disrespect intended, it sounds more like you are some sort of extreme carebear who is upset because devs aren't making all games instanced and allowing you to safely play only with your closest friends without the risk of having to interact with other players. This interaction is what people like about MMO games and if it doesn't suit you than perhaps you should consider some other style of gaming that is more controlled and predictable.
How is it that people like you always manage immense strides of cognitive dissonance. Every time I encounter this argument, I can demolish it the same way:
"Is a large, varied game world with thousands of things to see and do a good thing?"
If it is a good thing, then you are arguing against yourself. The larger the game world, see, the less you are forced to interact with others. The less you get a feeling of massive, since 5,000 people online in a game world that is 400 square miles is a lot less forced interaction than 5,000 people online in 40 square miles.
At the end of the day, instances simply allow certain things to happen. Storming an enemy fortress that's been completely decimated, has 5 groups sitting camping various spawns, and that you have to stand in line with to get to kill a boss is not epic. Having McGuild the 400 man wonder team call up 50 McGuildies to down content meant for 10 people because they're too goddamn stupid to know what the hell they're doing is not 'massive and intense.' It's just frikkin stupid. Remember the goddamn dragon kills? 150 people or so zerging a dragon, and it would fail because "Eh, we need 200 or so to down that dragon."
That's good to know. Nice to know it takes real strategy. Die, run back, die, run back, die, run back. Every single game has had to put something around its bosses to get away from that (Lineage puts them in a gate... because if you don't call it an instance, and pretend really hard it isn't an instance, maybe it won't be an instance).
If we think about the real world, yes, we have to put up with the drunks on the subway, or the bums ranting about aliens in the street corner, but at the end of the day, yes, we can just have a group of friends and go chill and watch a movie without letting the ranting bum inside.
I only wish that the minority in MMOs were that well behaved (see: Darkfall). Dunno why you think it fosters a great community when you give those tards unlimited ability to grief.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
Instancing has no place in raid dungons. It makes it easier to get the gear. It takes the "elitness" away from the gear. I like the "rareness" of gear. Give people somthing to strive for but only a small % of people can actually get. this does several things. First and foremost it kills the Zerg guilds as no one is going to join a guild of over 50ish because if you do chances are youll never see this "elite gear" I hate games that support Zerg guild. Zerg guilds use no skill, just throw wave after wave of people at a boss. The bosses in an no instancing game should be able to be killed with no more than 30 people. End game gear should be a 3 teir approach 1: good 2:great 3: elite. as you try for the next gear teir the difficulty should increase exponentially. I might be able to part with Instance the "great gear teir" with some restrictions like needing to farm a set of items to trigger the boss from an uninstance zone but no way for the elite boss to be instanced in any circumstance. Just to clarify this "elite gear" should only be about 5-8% stronger stat wise as to where its not an extreme advantage over your normal gear thats easier to get. Its nice having a peice of gear that only a handfull of the people on a server has a year after release. You casual WoW players have been spoiled by how easy it is for the casual MMO'er to get your gear. I prefer the "hardcore" PvE MMO. I see no point in everyone running around in the same gear. Needs to be stages of gear. Instancing makes stuff way to easy to get. I will say now that I am out of school I dont have the time needed to get the gear from an MMO that suports this difficulty in getting this "elite" gear. But i would still strive for it. I would still envy the handfull of guys on the server that has this super rare peice. This stuff about getting full raid gear on several characters is bogus. A great MMO will keep you occupied on your main character for years.
I'm not sure where you got the idea that having instanced dungeons makes it easy for everyone to get elite gear. WoW, City of Heroes (in its own way), and many other games all have instances and not everyone has the best gear, ESPECIALLY with Bind on Equip. It still takes ages to find groups that will do the particular instance YOU want to do, then you'll have to fight with your group for the gear IF IT EVEN DROPS! You can spend months raiding and not even complete a whole set. That doesn't account for the other set you'll need to pvp effectively, or the separate ones you'll need for scenario A, soloing, and scenario B, tanking/healing/supporting/whatever.
And why would I want to be occupied with a character for years? Seriously. A game is only that; a game. Come home from work, play for a few hours, relax and let off steam, chat with some friends, then you log off and go take care of real life things and who knows, maybe even enjoy time with people you can actually touch. A game should not take commitment just to be "mediocre" and years of my life to be "great", because eventually that game is going to end. The servers will die, people will move on, the creators will make a new game, and you will have wasted a part of your life on something that doesn't even matter.
If that's how you want to waste your life then by all means, but don't push that on the rest of us.
The reason for that has nothing to do with difficulty. 10 mans and 25mans in WoW are so easy its a joke. The only requirement is to have previously good gear. And Time, and a simple youtube of the fight.
Raids do no = diffuculty and BoP items are retarted. As well as BoE's. All it does it limit the items in the game for one character at a time, making people farm for more items.
W/out having items being BoP or BoE a person can use those items he just out leveled and sell the to someone lower than them. Letting them get money and profit off of the good items for their past levels.
By making items BoE it just makes them useless after you pass a level.
BoP and BoE was just another way for developers to require people to do a time sink. By allowing people to farm instances and not have items be BoP or BoE the ammount of these good items can be increased. But because WoW and most games that have BoE's and BoP are western mmos they do not feel the need to have crafting be a big part of the game.
Such as L2 or RO or many other JMMO or KMMOs were upgrading an item would be the difference between the common joe and the "this dude will eat my face in" player.
Not only that but by having everything available to the average player by them just having the money to buy it from grinding it allows everyone to acheive leetness in every form.
Thus you dont get the 98% pop being left out of good gear.
but the game does have loading screens in between zones correct...
If i understood it well, there are just loading screens when you teleporting, in the rifts, to enter or exit The Abyss and in the few instanced dungeons. Walking or flying you will only noticing you are changing zones if your comp its not so fast to manage the load in a smooth manner. They are working to improve the timings on it.
Think its like L2 or WoW, with decent computer you aren't in seamless (technical point of view) world but you aren't going to notice it (practical point of view).
Originally posted by onlinenow225 The reason for that has nothing to do with difficulty. 10 mans and 25mans in WoW are so easy its a joke. The only requirement is to have previously good gear. And Time, and a simple youtube of the fight.
Ah, so Naxxramus and Sunwell Plateau were easy jokes. That's good to know.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
Originally posted by Sharajat At the end of the day, instances simply allow certain things to happen. Storming an enemy fortress that's been completely decimated, has 5 groups sitting camping various spawns, and that you have to stand in line with to get to kill a boss is not epic. Having McGuild the 400 man wonder team call up 50 McGuildies to down content meant for 10 people because they're too goddamn stupid to know what the hell they're doing is not 'massive and intense.' It's just frikkin stupid. Remember the goddamn dragon kills? 150 people or so zerging a dragon, and it would fail because "Eh, we need 200 or so to down that dragon."
That's good to know. Nice to know it takes real strategy. Die, run back, die, run back, die, run back. Every single game has had to put something around its bosses to get away from that (Lineage puts them in a gate... because if you don't call it an instance, and pretend really hard it isn't an instance, maybe it won't be an instance).
Instances don't allow anything more than a properly designed open game world does. If you are running around and stumble upon a fortress that has been decimated by another group of players I think that this is good. It makes the world feel alive. Other players have done something interesting and unexpected and this gives you a choice about what you will do. Do you go into this fortress and see what has happened and what is going on or do you continue on your way and go somewhere else?
If you enter this fortress and it is being camped is this a problem to be solved by instancing? No, it isn't. First, if you instance this fortress than it will always be ready and waiting to be attacked. You will never come across something that has already happened or is in the process of happening. It's like the entire world is designed to be ready for YOU and this feels artificial and unimmersive. Besides, instancing the fortress wouldn't really solve the problem: not enough places for players to go and not enough things for them to do. If you design the game well than people don't need or want to camp this fortress because they want to go do other things as well.
And if people want to gather in groups of 50 to make something easy, why not? If you fail a raid beacuse you only have 150 players and not 200 why is this necessarily bad?
One of the great things about LIneage 2 was running around or hunting either alone or in a small group and seeing a huge group of players run by towards a raid area. You can stay where you are or go with them and see what was going on. Most players enjoyed joining the group to get involved with the action. It usually resulted in a disaster but it was fun anyways. And no, a closed gate doesn't mean it's an instance. It's still a single part of one big open world, it just happens to get closed off for a period of time because of the actions of other players. They don't disappear to some magical area that is there specifically for them, they are still in the same game world as you, the same cave that you've been in.
I wish to explain more but unfortunately a more important issue has come up and I have to go. I will try to come back ASAP...
"Is a large, varied game world with thousands of things to see and do a good thing?" If it is a good thing, then you are arguing against yourself. The larger the game world, see, the less you are forced to interact with others. The less you get a feeling of massive, since 5,000 people online in a game world that is 400 square miles is a lot less forced interaction than 5,000 people online in 40 square miles.
I disagree. It isn't about FORCING interaction it's about the POSSIBILITY of it. If you have an instance it becomes IMPOSSIBLE to interact with other players because you are in a totally seperate world that nobody else has access to.
For example...
I used to play Asherons Call 1. For those not familiar this was an EQ1 era game and was a HUGE open world with no zones. Although the game had portals for quick travel between towns you COULD run anywhere if you wanted to.
I like to explore so I would often run between towns or to distant areas on the map just to see what was there. Some areas were populated with a lot of cities fairly close together and running around in these areas meant a decent amount of players to encounter. Other more difficult areas near the far ends of the map were nearly empty. Sometimes you could run for an hour and not see anyone.
You imply that this can make a world feel empty and less massive but in my opinion it makes it feel full and more massive. There are so many more places to visit and explore, places that not everybody knows about. You can go visit a place that only a few players have ever seen and it makes the world feel so big when compared to a small world game where everyone has been everywhere and knows about everything. Or when you go to a popular town and see hundreds of players... in a big open world it makes it feel like there are tons of players in the world because there are so many people just in this one town yet there are so many other towns and so many other places where other people are. In a small game world you know that the town is full simply because there is nowhere else to go.
"Is a large, varied game world with thousands of things to see and do a good thing?" If it is a good thing, then you are arguing against yourself. The larger the game world, see, the less you are forced to interact with others. The less you get a feeling of massive, since 5,000 people online in a game world that is 400 square miles is a lot less forced interaction than 5,000 people online in 40 square miles.
I disagree. It isn't about FORCING interaction it's about the POSSIBILITY of it. If you have an instance it becomes IMPOSSIBLE to interact with other players because you are in a totally seperate world that nobody else has access to.
For example...
I used to play Asherons Call 1. For those not familiar this was an EQ1 era game and was a HUGE open world with no zones. Although the game had portals for quick travel between towns you COULD run anywhere if you wanted to.
I like to explore so I would often run between towns or to distant areas on the map just to see what was there. Some areas were populated with a lot of cities fairly close together and running around in these areas meant a decent amount of players to encounter. Other more difficult areas near the far ends of the map were nearly empty. Sometimes you could run for an hour and not see anyone.
You imply that this can make a world feel empty and less massive but in my opinion it makes it feel full and more massive. There are so many more places to visit and explore, places that not everybody knows about. You can go visit a place that only a few players have ever seen and it makes the world feel so big when compared to a small world game where everyone has been everywhere and knows about everything. Or when you go to a popular town and see hundreds of players... in a big open world it makes it feel like there are tons of players in the world because there are so many people just in this one town yet there are so many other towns and so many other places where other people are. In a small game world you know that the town is full simply because there is nowhere else to go.
I agree 100%! I love big, open worlds.
What I think people don't see is the vast amounts of advantages instances can give. LotRO really took them somewhere different, turning them into a semi-cinematic adventure that you have to overcome. WoW, despite the hatred, created some very tuned, interesting, difficult encounters (and despite the whining from people so anti-social they couldn't find 4 others who could stomach them, nevermind 24 or 39, they were difficult). Would Asheron's Call been a worse game if it had those TOO?
Replacing content with instances isn't something I agree with, but if both types of content are there, what's the big deal?
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
Comments
Yeah well, I don't think any random clan should be able to obtain the best items and kill the best bosses, that's why there will be certain peculiar dungeons for smaller/weaker guilds. Anyways, in L2, bosses like Frintezza were limited in numbers and the pvps pre-boss became way more even, that's what I expect for Aion.
Again, these comments come from really old interviews and Im yet to see how the final bosses will be handled, it might have changed these years.
Please elaborate I did not play L2. can every guild enter an instanced lair to fight the same boss?
Its a bitt offtopic, but because you ask
No, L2 was not instanced (i don't know with Gracia update, i left the game before it) it got just zoned dungeons for the main bosses. Just one boss to kill, and as have been said by Ephimero once the group is inside doors get closed and if the group kill the boss, there is no other way that wait till next respawn (a week for some bosses). As have been said by Ephimero too, it promotes massive PvP battles out of the dungeon to gain the access to it. Opposite at what you think it was promoting zerg , because just the most powerfull clans have opportunities to win the access to the dungeons and any raid bosses in general.
........... The zerg guild part of this disturbs me. I hate zerg guilds. Sadly if aion supports zerg guilds I will not be playing it long no matter how much I like it. If a guild of 60ish or so cant compete to get to fight any major boss in game because a guild of 100-500 people can PvP and sucessfully block off other guilds well than Id rather not play because zerging takes no skill. Sad thing is Aion is my last hope. I see no game worth playing after Aion
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Toddze, I just was trying to answer your question about how it is (may be it was?) in L2, probably Aion will be different.
I don't know if this passes as being different, Aion does have a 3rd faction mediator, the Balaur, which their main role is to place a handicap on zerglings. Of course, we have yet to see how effective they are...
I forgot where I read this, but they're trying to implement a new type of instancing. Maybe we should just wait and see...
"When you're born you're naked, when you die you're naked again, and in-between all we do is work, eat, and play MMOs." ~Forum Warrior #141
Ya I agree we should just wait and see. There is really no other option.
In general I have an idea on how to stop zerglings. It really is quite simple. First the Devs need to decide on how many people a guild needs to be sucesfull in the game. When a guild exceeds that number a debuff gets placed on all its members. The higher number of guild members a guild gets past the set number, the stronger the debuff. Since zerglings like to zerg let em, but when their by themselves there going to be easy prey. If they choose to roll in packs wherever they go thats cool, because thats the style they choose to play. Make em roll in packs or not zerg its that simple.
Edit: This aslo help keeps the difficulty in boss fights
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
Does everyone remember what a huge step backward instancing was when it was
introduced?
There are just no places that need to be instanced.
Corrected.
****************************
Playing : Uncharted Waters Online
****************************
As long as they dont do what guildwars did i am happy. Guildwars failed epicly as a MMO for me simply because it had like 20+ instances of the same city, and there was 0 open world player interaction except for a party. Had great PVP and story though. Was more like a single player campaign + multiplayer pvp
I think a game that is completely un-instanced would work great if there was NO uber lootz.
I'd like to see that game.
*dodges incoming tomatoes*
(,,,)=^__^=(,,,)
Does everyone remember what a huge step backward instancing was when it was
introduced?
There are just no places that need to be instanced.
Corrected.
Does everyone remember what a huge step backward MMORPGs was when it was introduced?
There are just no happy people that need to be in MMORPGs.
Time to go back to consoles, MMO devs are getting frustrated.
"When you're born you're naked, when you die you're naked again, and in-between all we do is work, eat, and play MMOs." ~Forum Warrior #141
Does everyone remember what a huge step backward instancing was when it was
introduced?
There are just no places that need to be instanced.
Corrected.
I honestly sometimes wonder if these boards are full of griefers who are angry that devs don't like having them in their game.
Sometimes I know that's the case. This is one of the latter times...
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
Does everyone remember what a huge step backward instancing was when it was
introduced?
There are just no places that need to be instanced.
Corrected.
I honestly sometimes wonder if these boards are full of griefers who are angry that devs don't like having them in their game.
Sometimes I know that's the case. This is one of the latter times...
I'm going to have to jump in here and step to his defense. Every MMO player I know hates instances. Instances are the exact opposite of what an MMO game is supposed to be.
MMO games are supposed to be massively multiplayer. The entire point of them is to allow thousands of players to interact with each other. Instances seperate the players from each other and this is counter to the entire idea behind an MMO game.
With no disrespect intended, it sounds more like you are some sort of extreme carebear who is upset because devs aren't making all games instanced and allowing you to safely play only with your closest friends without the risk of having to interact with other players. This interaction is what people like about MMO games and if it doesn't suit you than perhaps you should consider some other style of gaming that is more controlled and predictable.
The problem with this statement is you are not looking at the entire picture but only what you don't like.
Instances have their place, the problem we are seeing now is that they are far too over used. It's like giving a 16 year old booze, you can bet he'll run with it and get hammered. As much as he can. Intances were shiny and new, so let's use them everywhere!!
No that's a terrible idea I think we can all agree on that. However there are times and certain content that would not be in game at all if instances were not used. I'm thinking of times were there are cutscenes and major story arcs involved. There you are watching something really cool or important to the story develop and someone comes around to attack you.... And this keeps happening so you never get a moment's peace to watch the damn movie.
In that case, please give me an instance. Now in game where there are no movies and great big dialogues, then sure no instances make sense, and as I said no uber lootz either. I kinda like the new EQ2 idea where instead of a piece of equipment or weapon you get a trinket or ticket that you take to a vendor/trader and actually pick the uber piece you want. Still remains to be seen how it works out.
(,,,)=^__^=(,,,)
I agree with the poster above me, but I believe instances have their place, not only in story scenerios, but in certain kinds of dungeons, as well. But I'm a firm believer in the idea that the WORLD itself needs to be open, with no real barriers except the typical environment.
I think the better way to have said it is that in a good MMO, you can potentially play the same character for years and never run out of things to do, or goals to achieve.
If you *choose* to play the game over the course of a few years, what's wrong with that? How is it any worse than, say, going golfing, sitting in front of the TV, or going to the bar to blow a bunch of cash on alcohol... or whatever else?
You've got a rather narrow-minded perspective, IMO.
Also, MMOs have often been regarded by industry folk not as mere "games" but as "persistant virtual worlds". Also, that they're not merely games, but a service.
MMOs were conceived, from the start, to be a means of entertainment that could keep a player occupied and entertained for years. This is why the concept of an end-game a genre that is, by design, not supposed to have an ending seems so ridiculous to many.
This is also why you'll see people who've been playing EQ, UO, AO and various others even years after they started. Because their chosen one has continued to provide them entertainment.
What, exactly, is wrong with that?
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Sorry for killing the thread :P
uk.youtube.com/watch
Great kill!. Thanks for the link Ephimero.
What he said it's what i was hoping and guessing.
I agree with him 100% major content shoud not be instanced. (I said that earlier in a post). Its an MMO not a single player game. Only your personal story quests needs instanced because like he said you dont want others interupting that. Instancing is a cheep easy way out to make the game easier, and allows for less content.
Waiting for:EQ-Next, ArcheAge (not so much anymore)
Now Playing: N/A
Worst MMO: FFXIV
Favorite MMO: FFXI
How is it that people like you always manage immense strides of cognitive dissonance. Every time I encounter this argument, I can demolish it the same way:
"Is a large, varied game world with thousands of things to see and do a good thing?"
If it is a good thing, then you are arguing against yourself. The larger the game world, see, the less you are forced to interact with others. The less you get a feeling of massive, since 5,000 people online in a game world that is 400 square miles is a lot less forced interaction than 5,000 people online in 40 square miles.
At the end of the day, instances simply allow certain things to happen. Storming an enemy fortress that's been completely decimated, has 5 groups sitting camping various spawns, and that you have to stand in line with to get to kill a boss is not epic. Having McGuild the 400 man wonder team call up 50 McGuildies to down content meant for 10 people because they're too goddamn stupid to know what the hell they're doing is not 'massive and intense.' It's just frikkin stupid. Remember the goddamn dragon kills? 150 people or so zerging a dragon, and it would fail because "Eh, we need 200 or so to down that dragon."
That's good to know. Nice to know it takes real strategy. Die, run back, die, run back, die, run back. Every single game has had to put something around its bosses to get away from that (Lineage puts them in a gate... because if you don't call it an instance, and pretend really hard it isn't an instance, maybe it won't be an instance).
If we think about the real world, yes, we have to put up with the drunks on the subway, or the bums ranting about aliens in the street corner, but at the end of the day, yes, we can just have a group of friends and go chill and watch a movie without letting the ranting bum inside.
I only wish that the minority in MMOs were that well behaved (see: Darkfall). Dunno why you think it fosters a great community when you give those tards unlimited ability to grief.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
I'm not sure where you got the idea that having instanced dungeons makes it easy for everyone to get elite gear. WoW, City of Heroes (in its own way), and many other games all have instances and not everyone has the best gear, ESPECIALLY with Bind on Equip. It still takes ages to find groups that will do the particular instance YOU want to do, then you'll have to fight with your group for the gear IF IT EVEN DROPS! You can spend months raiding and not even complete a whole set. That doesn't account for the other set you'll need to pvp effectively, or the separate ones you'll need for scenario A, soloing, and scenario B, tanking/healing/supporting/whatever.
And why would I want to be occupied with a character for years? Seriously. A game is only that; a game. Come home from work, play for a few hours, relax and let off steam, chat with some friends, then you log off and go take care of real life things and who knows, maybe even enjoy time with people you can actually touch. A game should not take commitment just to be "mediocre" and years of my life to be "great", because eventually that game is going to end. The servers will die, people will move on, the creators will make a new game, and you will have wasted a part of your life on something that doesn't even matter.
If that's how you want to waste your life then by all means, but don't push that on the rest of us.
The reason for that has nothing to do with difficulty. 10 mans and 25mans in WoW are so easy its a joke. The only requirement is to have previously good gear. And Time, and a simple youtube of the fight.
Raids do no = diffuculty and BoP items are retarted. As well as BoE's. All it does it limit the items in the game for one character at a time, making people farm for more items.
W/out having items being BoP or BoE a person can use those items he just out leveled and sell the to someone lower than them. Letting them get money and profit off of the good items for their past levels.
By making items BoE it just makes them useless after you pass a level.
BoP and BoE was just another way for developers to require people to do a time sink. By allowing people to farm instances and not have items be BoP or BoE the ammount of these good items can be increased. But because WoW and most games that have BoE's and BoP are western mmos they do not feel the need to have crafting be a big part of the game.
Such as L2 or RO or many other JMMO or KMMOs were upgrading an item would be the difference between the common joe and the "this dude will eat my face in" player.
Not only that but by having everything available to the average player by them just having the money to buy it from grinding it allows everyone to acheive leetness in every form.
Thus you dont get the 98% pop being left out of good gear.
but the game does have loading screens in between zones correct...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Guys! I'm hopelessly lost in a mountain of mole hills! Them damn moles!
If i understood it well, there are just loading screens when you teleporting, in the rifts, to enter or exit The Abyss and in the few instanced dungeons. Walking or flying you will only noticing you are changing zones if your comp its not so fast to manage the load in a smooth manner. They are working to improve the timings on it.
Think its like L2 or WoW, with decent computer you aren't in seamless (technical point of view) world but you aren't going to notice it (practical point of view).
Not totally sure if it is exactly this way.
Ah, so Naxxramus and Sunwell Plateau were easy jokes. That's good to know.
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson
Instances don't allow anything more than a properly designed open game world does. If you are running around and stumble upon a fortress that has been decimated by another group of players I think that this is good. It makes the world feel alive. Other players have done something interesting and unexpected and this gives you a choice about what you will do. Do you go into this fortress and see what has happened and what is going on or do you continue on your way and go somewhere else?
If you enter this fortress and it is being camped is this a problem to be solved by instancing? No, it isn't. First, if you instance this fortress than it will always be ready and waiting to be attacked. You will never come across something that has already happened or is in the process of happening. It's like the entire world is designed to be ready for YOU and this feels artificial and unimmersive. Besides, instancing the fortress wouldn't really solve the problem: not enough places for players to go and not enough things for them to do. If you design the game well than people don't need or want to camp this fortress because they want to go do other things as well.
And if people want to gather in groups of 50 to make something easy, why not? If you fail a raid beacuse you only have 150 players and not 200 why is this necessarily bad?
One of the great things about LIneage 2 was running around or hunting either alone or in a small group and seeing a huge group of players run by towards a raid area. You can stay where you are or go with them and see what was going on. Most players enjoyed joining the group to get involved with the action. It usually resulted in a disaster but it was fun anyways. And no, a closed gate doesn't mean it's an instance. It's still a single part of one big open world, it just happens to get closed off for a period of time because of the actions of other players. They don't disappear to some magical area that is there specifically for them, they are still in the same game world as you, the same cave that you've been in.
I wish to explain more but unfortunately a more important issue has come up and I have to go. I will try to come back ASAP...
I disagree. It isn't about FORCING interaction it's about the POSSIBILITY of it. If you have an instance it becomes IMPOSSIBLE to interact with other players because you are in a totally seperate world that nobody else has access to.
For example...
I used to play Asherons Call 1. For those not familiar this was an EQ1 era game and was a HUGE open world with no zones. Although the game had portals for quick travel between towns you COULD run anywhere if you wanted to.
I like to explore so I would often run between towns or to distant areas on the map just to see what was there. Some areas were populated with a lot of cities fairly close together and running around in these areas meant a decent amount of players to encounter. Other more difficult areas near the far ends of the map were nearly empty. Sometimes you could run for an hour and not see anyone.
You imply that this can make a world feel empty and less massive but in my opinion it makes it feel full and more massive. There are so many more places to visit and explore, places that not everybody knows about. You can go visit a place that only a few players have ever seen and it makes the world feel so big when compared to a small world game where everyone has been everywhere and knows about everything. Or when you go to a popular town and see hundreds of players... in a big open world it makes it feel like there are tons of players in the world because there are so many people just in this one town yet there are so many other towns and so many other places where other people are. In a small game world you know that the town is full simply because there is nowhere else to go.
I disagree. It isn't about FORCING interaction it's about the POSSIBILITY of it. If you have an instance it becomes IMPOSSIBLE to interact with other players because you are in a totally seperate world that nobody else has access to.
For example...
I used to play Asherons Call 1. For those not familiar this was an EQ1 era game and was a HUGE open world with no zones. Although the game had portals for quick travel between towns you COULD run anywhere if you wanted to.
I like to explore so I would often run between towns or to distant areas on the map just to see what was there. Some areas were populated with a lot of cities fairly close together and running around in these areas meant a decent amount of players to encounter. Other more difficult areas near the far ends of the map were nearly empty. Sometimes you could run for an hour and not see anyone.
You imply that this can make a world feel empty and less massive but in my opinion it makes it feel full and more massive. There are so many more places to visit and explore, places that not everybody knows about. You can go visit a place that only a few players have ever seen and it makes the world feel so big when compared to a small world game where everyone has been everywhere and knows about everything. Or when you go to a popular town and see hundreds of players... in a big open world it makes it feel like there are tons of players in the world because there are so many people just in this one town yet there are so many other towns and so many other places where other people are. In a small game world you know that the town is full simply because there is nowhere else to go.
I agree 100%! I love big, open worlds.
What I think people don't see is the vast amounts of advantages instances can give. LotRO really took them somewhere different, turning them into a semi-cinematic adventure that you have to overcome. WoW, despite the hatred, created some very tuned, interesting, difficult encounters (and despite the whining from people so anti-social they couldn't find 4 others who could stomach them, nevermind 24 or 39, they were difficult). Would Asheron's Call been a worse game if it had those TOO?
Replacing content with instances isn't something I agree with, but if both types of content are there, what's the big deal?
In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own.
-Thomas Jefferson