Well, I think this a good question to ask. I was designing my level chart for my new map for my world. And my world has way more environmental areas versus dungeons then I expected. So this question occurred to me then. What is the difference between camp check and instances? Well the old school mmo players should know what a camp check is. But for those who do not know. A camp check means you go into a zone, and shout for a camp. A camp, basically means a safe location where a puller can pull a nice abundance of names back to your camp, to "farm" for the named mob's loot. Well, everyone should know what an instance is. If you had to choose, what would you choose and why? I think I am going to go with camp check if I had to choose between the two. After pondering on it, I think camps add more world community that new mmos are lacking. It also adds competition and can limit kill steals. I just have so many fond memories of EQ I guess. But also after thinking it over, I could deal with both. So, if you had to pick one...which would it be.. camp check or instance?
LOL .. camping is the WORST non-fun activity a game can offer. Instance hands down. I don't play a GAME that requires me to get a number an wait IN LINE to kill a boss.
Plus, it takes the challenge out. If 100 people are lining up for a boss, it is pretty safe to say that you don't need much to kill it.
Who cares about "world" community? Seriously i have time may be for a dozen friends in an MMO. Anything else is a waste of time. EQ is a very bad game in that aspect. Modern instance based dungeons >>>> old camping of EQ. There is a reason why the industry never looks back.
Oh yeah? There is a reason why the community never looks back? So why do people have fond memories about, EQ, DAoC, AC and UO? How come you don't see fond memories of WoW or any game after WoW? I don't even see WoW players reminiscing about their experiences? If everything is great now, how come everyone on here is complaining about it? Obviously, EQ, DOaC, AC and UO did something right to make players have a grand experience they would never forget.
From your statement "Who cares about "world" community. It seems that you may be one of those people who are absolutely selfish and don't even care about anyone else, so I could see why you would make that statement valid. The community sure has changed since then. Everyone now wants everything right now. Instances are okay, however they take away from the immersive world. You don't go to a themepark and pick what instance your in. Thanks, WoW for bringing out these kind of people...why can't this genre go back to it's niche form? /rant off
But seriously, I guess people don't understand this thread much. It's my fault, because I apparently suck at explaining my self. The question should be, in a single shard game world (that means everyone plays one server) what would you rather consider, a camp check system or instance based? This question is for anyone that read this reply.
What's up with that statement? You can pick what instance you want to be in with the WOW looking for dungeon tool.
And i said the INDUSTRY never look back, not a small niche hardcorers almost nostalgic about the past. I played EQ since beta and i don't have fond memories. It is pretty bad as a game compared to WOW (horrible down-time, no-fun camping).
These newer generation of gamers will not respect Camp Checks. Just visit aionsource and ask the folks about getting constantly kill stealed on mobs, bosses etc. Most gamers now are extremely competitive these days even against their own guild mates rolling need on things that are hardly upgrades vs. the other person who desperately needs the item.
hell even when camp checks "worked" in EQ, you would have jackasses holding the camp spot for hours on end and passing them along to their guild mates. Not only that, it makes more work for GM's stacking up their queue with pointless QQ 'reports' about other players not playing fair. Meanwhile, more important things being pushed back into queue being resolved a little too late.
so ya, as much as some of you want to relive the past, theres a very good reason why a lot of newer games opt for instances over open world camps. Its to give every player the same opportunity to take care in as much content as their schedule will allow and not favor the power gamers or "pro" gamers (ie. no lifers)
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a robot foot stomping on a human face -- forever."
Originally posted by Eronakis The question should be, in a single shard game world (that means everyone plays one server) what would you rather consider, a camp check system or instance based? This question is for anyone that read this reply.
Disregarding all the prior discussion in this thread my answer to this would be camp check. Of course it has it's problems but all things considered I think it's better than instances.
I remember when EQ added the instanced "Lost dungeons of Norrath". Those dungeons were ok I guess but by instancing them they lost much of the "EQ" feel of the game. It made it all feel so...artificial. Well ok, everything in these games is artificial but by separating people in private instances the game really does lose any sort of <world> feeling it might have otherwise had.
And encountering other people in a shared world is really what mmorpgs are all about. Yes, there are problems and bad things about it but that's just the nature of sharing your playground with other people. You have to take the good with the bad. This trend we have now of games using more and more instancing is completely destroying the entire concept that mmorpgs were originally based on and that was/is the idea of putting thousands of players together in one shared world.
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>.
Ok, so having people sharing the same world creates problems? Alright, so try to find ways to improve it. Don't take the easy way out and destroy what mmorpgs are supposed to be in the first place.
Original WoW had both, camp check and instances. The players voted with their feet. Camp check lost big time.
When was this? I played original WoW, and I recall there not being many camps (I don't think WoW has any real camps). Actually to level in original WoW, you would just go around grinding the same World PVE content.
YES, there were open world named mobs that dropped blue or epic loot. I remember hunting for a few of them.
I wouldn't say that WoW provided camps that were at the same level of quality as other MMORPGs. Where were rare spawns, with good loot tables, etc.? They weren't there. There is no world PVE content in original WoW that had comparable loot to instance loot.
Spawn camping is the opposite of quality gaming. What exactly is a quality experience about sitting in one spot for HOURS killing the exact same mobs over ad over again. Pull, taunt, sit around for 5 minutes, ect. You can't understand why people find that incredibly boring now? World bosses dropped epic loot, so you're wrong=) Random epics DID drop off of random mobs, so your'e wrong. Where do you think the BOE purples on the AH came from=)
Had they populated World zones with high quality loot, there would have been more people camping stuff in the world. It just was never there.
Wrong=)
Original WoW and WoW to this day consists of the following:
World content with bad loot tables
Instanced content with good loot tables
So it was never an issue of people voting, they never had camps in WoW and they still don't. Why would anyone farm World content for inferior exp and inferior loot?
Open world was mostly designed for solo play with some opportunities to group up. Open world dungeon-like areas like those bug caves, temples and elite areas were in every 20+ zone.
YES, dungeons provided the better quality content overall, but that was by design. Dungeons were harder and offered better loot. The open world was easier and offered mostly average loot except for those random epic drops & world bosses. The harder content had better rewards. How is that a problem? People who are still stuck 10 years ago trying to play newer games, in WOW's case not even new anymore. They're the problem. CHutes and Ladders was fun too when I first started playing board games. Now, not so fun anymore. Thats spawn camping...an old retired gameplay dynamic no one really wants anymore.
Well it really isn't much of a 'camp check' system if the players can simply move to a viable unoccupied spot when their favourite camping spot is taken. That is simply a 'camping' system. A 'camp check' system pretty much requires that all the available spots be taken and players either have to 'kill steal' from each other or wait in line for one to free up.
That sounds like such a horrible game design that I can't picture anything but the most diehard of EQ flagellates finding that remotely likable.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
If Im not mistaken Aion went this route. So did Vanguard in the long run in a roundabout sort of way. With their raid dungeons.
I personally like instancing if done correctly,. However most games that have added instancing or have both completely kill the open world content off. IE no one does it.
I remember back in EQ1 added its instancing. If I remember correctly it was the Lost Dungeons of Norrath expansion. I absolutely loved it at first. However one of the things I noticed happened after they added it was that it was alot harder to get outside nonstanced groups going because of it. Which would kinda suck if you were wanting to go after an item that dropped off that named boss. However in an instance everyone would get something usually and people stopped caring about grouping just to group for the sake of having fun with friends.
This leads me to the negative of instancing. Instancing in my view kills the community. I cant count the amount of times that I have finished an instance and people just drop the group sometimes without so much as a goodbye.
While its a good thing that everyone has a better chance of recieving something out of instance. They seem to promote the GREED that plagues gamers these days. That is come get what you want finish the instance and leave.
Dont get me wrong you can make friends on instancing. It just doesnt seem to form the bonds you get when doing open world content where people gather sure to go after things they need. But also gather to just hang out and have a good time
Find a good mix would be my opininion. Vanguard had it right. Open world dungeons with their multi shard raid dungeons.
I like the idea of RARE (and i do mean RARE) world bosses being on a LOOONG world timer. Like the dragons in old EQ... Where the loot they could drop would actually be RARE... meaning not everyone and their brother had it. .... .And when you saw someone wielding it or wearing it you would be like WOW... that item is awesome.
Instancing creates to many carbon copies everyone has the same damn thing.
And quit generalizing about what people want. Just because you want your MMORPG to end up like Diablo 2 or Guildwars doesn't mean other players want it.
Many people want to bring back an open world without usage of instancing. There are a lot of other problems that involve instancing too, how do you have a fun and open PvP server when you provide all of your content in instances? No one has a will to PvP on those servers, they can't fight each other over anything.
With the popularity of WOW, guildwar and the new cross realm dungeon grps in WOW, i would say a lot of players want instancing + Diablo type lobby dungeoning.
And the "problem" is not that great because few wants open PvP server. In fact, no one complains (and many cheers) when wow is moving to a more instanced based pvp model.
Camp check is painful but I remember EQ1 back in the day when even if someone was holding the camp and you wanted to be next in line just hanging out with them was enjoyable and added a social aspect to the game. Plus the simple fact that you respected their camp and was willing to help out to get them their item would give you quite a good reputation of not being a douche bag.
When instances first started showing up I was thinking YEA woo I finally get to go some place with out camp checking... but I will be alone .
Well, I think this a good question to ask. I was designing my level chart for my new map for my world. And my world has way more environmental areas versus dungeons then I expected. So this question occurred to me then. What is the difference between camp check and instances? Well the old school mmo players should know what a camp check is. But for those who do not know. A camp check means you go into a zone, and shout for a camp. A camp, basically means a safe location where a puller can pull a nice abundance of names back to your camp, to "farm" for the named mob's loot. Well, everyone should know what an instance is. If you had to choose, what would you choose and why? I think I am going to go with camp check if I had to choose between the two. After pondering on it, I think camps add more world community that new mmos are lacking. It also adds competition and can limit kill steals. I just have so many fond memories of EQ I guess. But also after thinking it over, I could deal with both. So, if you had to pick one...which would it be.. camp check or instance?
Why does it have to be one or the other? A mixture of both is what I find to be the most entertaining. Although, I suppose if I had to choose it would be instances for me. As much as I loved EQ I can deal without the days of camp checks, trains, and squabbling over camps myself.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I agree that a mixture of both is what is needed. There is no reason that we should be required to choose one style or the other. One of the things I remember most about playing EQ was camping mobs on an 18 hour spawn cycle just to get a specific item with a 33% drop rate.
This kind of gameplay is what makes certain types of gear (Special).
I do enjoy instances, but I would love to see a game that injected a roughly 25%-35% instanced gameplay system, with the majority of the rest being Camp Checked game play.
I do believe that too many instances can suck a large portion of the sense of Comunity out of a good MMO. Sometimes it is just as cool to watch a badass group of higher skill players drop a wicked mob, as it is to drop the wicked mob yourself. In the military medical profession we call that system "See One Do One Teach One".
Both instanced and persistant content have their good and bad points and their good and bad uses. Since I began my MMO playing with EQ in '99 I am partial to persistant content so keep that in mind as I try to contribute to this debate.
In my very first day of playing EQ I was in the east commonlands fighting the lower level mobs but I kept getting killed by the bears and a cleric also soloing there noticed this. I got in a fight with one and it was again getting the best of me so she ran over and started healing and I survived. We grouped up after that and we stayed friends for years adding several more regular friends along the way.
MMOGs are first and foremost a community. Everquest and games like it have changed computer gaming forever and there is no going back now. Persistant content seems, to me, to support and enhance far more social interaction than instanced content ever could. Just take my example above and instead imagine if I were in a solo instance with nobody around to give me a hand (or to hinder my progress but this is another debate).
Instanced content has it's place in MMOGs as well. In EQ, the game at top level could get tedious and boring- especially pre-Kunark. All the 6 man dungeons would be full to the brim and sometines 6 man groups would be "camping" a single mob. Instanced content ensures that there is always something for everyone to do. I know people will argue one way or another about whether the highest end gear and content should be available to only a few people or to everyone but I put myself strongly on the side that since all of the players pay the same price to play then all of the players should have the opportunity to experience all of the content and get all of the gear. Given the history of high-end raiding and the extremely high demand for these areas and their gear, the only way I can see this accomplished currently is with instancing. EQ did this brilliantly with the PoP expansion and for myself and most of the EQ vets I talk to this was EQ's shining moment-barring the instant travel to far off areas(though the instant travel thing is another debate).
Trust me though, I am not at all a nostalgic all out EQ fan. That game had tons of problems and some of the newer games have addressed some of them- but not all. The biggest problem I see with some of the newer games is that they have left behind alot of the things that EQ got right.
So to me an MMOG must contain both persistant and instanced content to both provide a really good gaming experience and keep some old problems to a minimum. The mix of these two areas will eventually be one of the most influential factors on what kind of players play the game and how many of them there are.
Well, I think this a good question to ask. I was designing my level chart for my new map for my world. And my world has way more environmental areas versus dungeons then I expected. So this question occurred to me then. What is the difference between camp check and instances? Well the old school mmo players should know what a camp check is. But for those who do not know. A camp check means you go into a zone, and shout for a camp. A camp, basically means a safe location where a puller can pull a nice abundance of names back to your camp, to "farm" for the named mob's loot. Well, everyone should know what an instance is. If you had to choose, what would you choose and why? I think I am going to go with camp check if I had to choose between the two. After pondering on it, I think camps add more world community that new mmos are lacking. It also adds competition and can limit kill steals. I just have so many fond memories of EQ I guess. But also after thinking it over, I could deal with both. So, if you had to pick one...which would it be.. camp check or instance?
Why does it have to be one or the other? A mixture of both is what I find to be the most entertaining. Although, I suppose if I had to choose it would be instances for me. As much as I loved EQ I can deal without the days of camp checks, trains, and squabbling over camps myself.
Well I think you might be right. However, you could theory test with both play styles in the game and hope players would initialize both aspects of that design. However, if you can go to an instance and "guarantee" items or whatever. So, the people who may enjoy the socializing with "camp checks"; they might be limited in the amount of people who would want to group and camp.
I think a good solution would be to omit the instances and just "zone" dungeons off. But again, I think it really depends on the server constraints for lag issues for a single shard world. I think instances should be the last resort because they do destroy a persistant world.
Originally posted by Eronakis The question should be, in a single shard game world (that means everyone plays one server) what would you rather consider, a camp check system or instance based? This question is for anyone that read this reply.
Disregarding all the prior discussion in this thread my answer to this would be camp check. Of course it has it's problems but all things considered I think it's better than instances.
I remember when EQ added the instanced "Lost dungeons of Norrath". Those dungeons were ok I guess but by instancing them they lost much of the "EQ" feel of the game. It made it all feel so...artificial. Well ok, everything in these games is artificial but by separating people in private instances the game really does lose any sort of <world> feeling it might have otherwise had.
And encountering other people in a shared world is really what mmorpgs are all about. Yes, there are problems and bad things about it but that's just the nature of sharing your playground with other people. You have to take the good with the bad. This trend we have now of games using more and more instancing is completely destroying the entire concept that mmorpgs were originally based on and that was/is the idea of putting thousands of players together in one shared world.
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>.
Ok, so having people sharing the same world creates problems? Alright, so try to find ways to improve it. Don't take the easy way out and destroy what mmorpgs are supposed to be in the first place.
You sir hit the nail on the head. I'd rather take another course then the instance based route. My idea for an mmorpg would actually bring back the essentials of what the mmorpgs are missing now. Pretty much everything pre wow. However, I am modifing those play styles and designs where they make more sense and improve the world that the players live in.
Well I think you might be right. However, you could theory test with both play styles in the game and hope players would initialize both aspects of that design. However, if you can go to an instance and "guarantee" items or whatever. So, the people who may enjoy the socializing with "camp checks"; they might be limited in the amount of people who would want to group and camp. I think a good solution would be to omit the instances and just "zone" dungeons off. But again, I think it really depends on the server constraints for lag issues for a single shard world. I think instances should be the last resort because they do destroy a persistant world.
Well, there are ways to entice people to play both styles through quests, varied loot from both play areas, etc. Of course, that all makes it more time consuming for the developer, but in the end can lead to some excellent entertainment value for those that like both play styles yet provide both styles of content for those that simply prefer one over the other. Which in turn, least in my opinion, increases the potential draw of your product from potential customers.
The one problem with completely open areas is the farming or powerleveling to be had by high levels jacking up areas for low level players since they can kill things extra quick compared to those trying to do the content at the appropriate level. Not an issue really on PvP servers but on PvE servers it can make content virtually unplayable unless certain measures aren't taken to address this type of behavior. For whatever reason, you didn't seem to see a lot of this back in the day but now a days this is a rather common occurrence in open area content when there aren't any parameters set to curb this. Although, I suppose if your goal is just to have PvP server play than it's a non issue but that within itself would limit the audience of your game.
EDIT: Pardon me if this post doesn't make a lot of sense heh. I have a killer headache right now so for all I know what i'm writing could be all over the map. Bleh
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Also an old school EQ'er....but that isn't completely my reason for choosing this over instancing. Although instances can be nice to avoid random player KS's, trains, etc....it takes away from the MMORPG feel of an open world and community interaction. For me personally, that kills the immersion and fun of playing an MMO. Otherwise, it is a heavily instanced world like another infamous game and may as well be a single player console RPG. Except I end up paying much more than $50-$60 bucks to play it from start to finish like a sucker.
Well it really isn't much of a 'camp check' system if the players can simply move to a viable unoccupied spot when their favourite camping spot is taken. That is simply a 'camping' system. A 'camp check' system pretty much requires that all the available spots be taken and players either have to 'kill steal' from each other or wait in line for one to free up.
That sounds like such a horrible game design that I can't picture anything but the most diehard of EQ flagellates finding that remotely likable.
I do not think that many people posting on this thread really understand what is meant by a 'camp check system'. They think it is just a 'camp-grind' system
Instances; I have fond memories of WoW btw and I didn't start my MMO career there. Actually, back in 2002 when instancing wasn't an issue at all I had a long and harsh discussion about how camp checks suck and how cool it would be if you could just go somewhere and know what you're facing...
... so yea, I'm not a spoiled greenhorn, I'm just not glorifying a system that sucked 10 years ago as much as it sucks now
Depends on the game honestly. If the game has mechanics in place which promote the ability to sit in one spot to pull mobs for XP, then obviously I would prefer a camp system over instancing, but if the game is more about dungeon crawls, I would rather see instancing, so I don't have to worry about some group stealing my kills or camping a mob my group may need.
Honestly though, sometimes I do miss XP camps. It's a lot more relaxing to simply sit back in a single camp than constantly be on the move "all the time." I like dungeons and run through them quite frequently, but sometimes I'd just like to sit back and let the XP roll. I sorta miss the old EQ system with the LDoNs sometimes. I think back in those days, the dungeon crawl vs camp mechanic was divided perfectly.
Camp check. Also an old school EQ'er....but that isn't completely my reason for choosing this over instancing. Although instances can be nice to avoid random player KS's, trains, etc....it takes away from the MMORPG feel of an open world and community interaction. For me personally, that kills the immersion and fun of playing an MMO. Otherwise, it is a heavily instanced world like another infamous game and may as well be a single player console RPG. Except I end up paying much more than $50-$60 bucks to play it from start to finish like a sucker.
I'll never get this attitude - at all. I remember so many occasions when some random a** stole kills that were on a 4, 5 hour respawn timer or idiots that trained multiple adds into your AE spells.
Actually for me it always was the other way around, I approach a heavily crowded dungeon/location and there are already people fighting left and right, some areas have just been emptied so they look as if they should be crowded with evil villains but aren't. Then you stand somewhere and half the room respawns right under your butt.
I mean OUR group is on the quest to take out the trash in the fallen caverns of death, not a bunch of random idiots that turn the caverns into a subway station.
As I already said, even back then these were only some of the many reasons i hated free-for-all-mobs of any kind.
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>.
Who says what should be essential? In my view, anything that adds to the fun is good.
You won't be able to make frds or socialize with thousands of people anyway. I am in a pretty big guild and I probably have time to know may be 1-2 dozen players. It makes zero difference to me if the world is populated with 500 people or 50000 people.
Plus, I really don't want to wait in line with 50 others .. that breaks immersion more than anything else. Have you ever heard/seen/watch a fantasy story where a party of heroes goes into a dungeon, take a number behind 50 others to take a shot at a dragon?
Plus, massive != massive EVERYWHERE in the world. It is enough for me if there are lots of people in major cities (which is the case in many MMORPGs). There is no need to make dungeons as crowded as cities.
There is NOTHING you cannot do in a normal camp party that you get from a RAID.
I think people are sort of reacting to some sort of stigma in their attitude towards raiding ,i think they think it is like the Olympics or something lol.Like i already said you can achieve the EXACT same thing in a camp,so why bother with instances?
SIMPLE answer is it is a heck of a lot easier for a developer to make instances,they are a cheap form of mapping.You are also removed from the community and the game world,so it really is a dumb idea.Many of the older cheaper game engines had to use instances,they could not handle one large sized world.
When i play a game whatever it is say WOW for example,i login to play WOW,i do not login to romper room through a bunch of square boxes some mapper made,and that is exactly what instances are.I want t o feel i am part of the game world and doing things that matter in the game world,instances are removing one self from the game world and offer nothing to the game world.They are just a cheap way for a developer to add a BOSS zone.
Maybe the BIGGEST factor that makes Raiding a joke?75% of the players can do whatever the heck they want,they are not important to the raid at all,they can nuke away or throw heals around with no purpose,they can melee with no care in the world,and MOST Raids have more than one tank,so you can be a failure and still win lol.
So i don't know if easy mode and an innocent bystander is FUN,so be it,i find the challenge of a normal group to be much more steady fun as every player in the group matters and one tank goes down your party has a good chance of dying ,that IS fun and excitement.The majority are ONLY doing an instance for loot anyhow,the instance itself is a boring joke,remove the loot then tell me how much fun it is ..nada zilch.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>. Who says what should be essential? In my view, anything that adds to the fun is good. You won't be able to make frds or socialize with thousands of people anyway. I am in a pretty big guild and I probably have time to know may be 1-2 dozen players. It makes zero difference to me if the world is populated with 500 people or 50000 people. Plus, I really don't want to wait in line with 50 others .. that breaks immersion more than anything else. Have you ever heard/seen/watch a fantasy story where a party of heroes goes into a dungeon, take a number behind 50 others to take a shot at a dragon? Plus, massive != massive EVERYWHERE in the world. It is enough for me if there are lots of people in major cities (which is the case in many MMORPGs). There is no need to make dungeons as crowded as cities.
Depends on the game. If the people shape the world like in EvE or you need many players to keep the game mechanic running like in WAR population is king.
But for a pure, classic PvE game (like EQ) it doesn't matter at - all. You need your 25 guildies and that's pretty much it...
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>. Who says what should be essential? In my view, anything that adds to the fun is good. You won't be able to make frds or socialize with thousands of people anyway. I am in a pretty big guild and I probably have time to know may be 1-2 dozen players. It makes zero difference to me if the world is populated with 500 people or 50000 people. Plus, I really don't want to wait in line with 50 others .. that breaks immersion more than anything else. Have you ever heard/seen/watch a fantasy story where a party of heroes goes into a dungeon, take a number behind 50 others to take a shot at a dragon? Plus, massive != massive EVERYWHERE in the world. It is enough for me if there are lots of people in major cities (which is the case in many MMORPGs). There is no need to make dungeons as crowded as cities.
Yeah, people competing over real resources break immersion, as opposed to people having a copy of everything and not sharing the same zones with each other.
What world are you living in? Because in the real world, there are no instances. People compete over real resources. You don't have infinite copies of everything each in their own alternate reality.
I came from a game with no instancing, and I knew every person on my server.. level 1-60. That was a real MMORPG, called Everquest.
What you have now, is Lobby of Warcraft. Tons of useless shared zones: Cities, newbie zones, etc. Anything important in the game is instanced. How is that different from Diablo 2, picking and choosing what rooms you want to go into? It isn't. It isn't an MMORPG, period.
Difference between a real MMORPG and a failure MMORPG wannabe is that in a real MMORPG you share a world and share resources. You know people on your server, the people on your server matter, PvP on your server matters, PvE on your server matters.
Instancing ruins immersion, ruins any chance of that game having a good and open World PVP system, and it leads to welfare epics.
Games with instances shouldn't be bought if they are going to be labeled as MMORPGs. Maybe when they label them single player games or instance-based RPGs or some other name to make it obvious.. then I won't care. But really, to call any game with instancing an MMORPG is beyond idiotic.
Aye.
True, you had some asshats who would KS, or the random idiot who didn't know how to play very well that would train through mobs trying to save their own hides...but for me at least, it was also part of the fun, and is what separated the good players from the bad. You learned where the best spots to avoid such mishaps were, the patterns/tendencies of certain mobs, etc, etc.
Not like today's MMO's, where a large majority of a given server's populace reach top lvl and STILL don't know how to play there classes because they can blow through content in a month or less without breaking a sweat. Mot play exclusively in instances and have no idea how to play their classes, how their classes compliment other classes in combat, etc. Open worlds SHOULD mean free-for-all mobs. Not mobs that cater to an individual player. It's when dev's started catering to the whiny masses that MMO's started a downward spiral of mediocracy.
Don't get me wrong... again, instancing has it's merits, but for me, at the end of the day when it comes to a MMORPG, it should be story driven, adventurous, have meaningful quests (Long and story driven, possibly even chain quests...not a billion "Kill/Collect X" amount quests), and give you a feeling of satisfaction and attachment to your character through the dedication and effort put into developing it over a long period of time, while competing with other players (Not only in PvP, but strictly PvE worlds via resources, etc). An open world with some of the harshness of (somewhat) real world effects provides that more so than allowing players to shut themselves out almost entirely from the rest of the community via their own personal instance so they can get phat lootz in an hour or so and look like everyone else.
Too many want instances and instant gratification aspects. MMORPG's (at least were) suppose to be long games that took time to develop a character in. It made you appreciate your character more, grow attached to it, not as much it's items. Getting past those difficult mobs, zones, travel areas, etc were an accomplishment in itself that brought satisfaction. But...just wasting breath...
Comments
LOL .. camping is the WORST non-fun activity a game can offer. Instance hands down. I don't play a GAME that requires me to get a number an wait IN LINE to kill a boss.
Plus, it takes the challenge out. If 100 people are lining up for a boss, it is pretty safe to say that you don't need much to kill it.
Who cares about "world" community? Seriously i have time may be for a dozen friends in an MMO. Anything else is a waste of time. EQ is a very bad game in that aspect. Modern instance based dungeons >>>> old camping of EQ. There is a reason why the industry never looks back.
Oh yeah? There is a reason why the community never looks back? So why do people have fond memories about, EQ, DAoC, AC and UO? How come you don't see fond memories of WoW or any game after WoW? I don't even see WoW players reminiscing about their experiences? If everything is great now, how come everyone on here is complaining about it? Obviously, EQ, DOaC, AC and UO did something right to make players have a grand experience they would never forget.
From your statement "Who cares about "world" community. It seems that you may be one of those people who are absolutely selfish and don't even care about anyone else, so I could see why you would make that statement valid. The community sure has changed since then. Everyone now wants everything right now. Instances are okay, however they take away from the immersive world. You don't go to a themepark and pick what instance your in. Thanks, WoW for bringing out these kind of people...why can't this genre go back to it's niche form? /rant off
But seriously, I guess people don't understand this thread much. It's my fault, because I apparently suck at explaining my self. The question should be, in a single shard game world (that means everyone plays one server) what would you rather consider, a camp check system or instance based? This question is for anyone that read this reply.
What's up with that statement? You can pick what instance you want to be in with the WOW looking for dungeon tool.
And i said the INDUSTRY never look back, not a small niche hardcorers almost nostalgic about the past. I played EQ since beta and i don't have fond memories. It is pretty bad as a game compared to WOW (horrible down-time, no-fun camping).
These newer generation of gamers will not respect Camp Checks. Just visit aionsource and ask the folks about getting constantly kill stealed on mobs, bosses etc. Most gamers now are extremely competitive these days even against their own guild mates rolling need on things that are hardly upgrades vs. the other person who desperately needs the item.
hell even when camp checks "worked" in EQ, you would have jackasses holding the camp spot for hours on end and passing them along to their guild mates. Not only that, it makes more work for GM's stacking up their queue with pointless QQ 'reports' about other players not playing fair. Meanwhile, more important things being pushed back into queue being resolved a little too late.
so ya, as much as some of you want to relive the past, theres a very good reason why a lot of newer games opt for instances over open world camps. Its to give every player the same opportunity to take care in as much content as their schedule will allow and not favor the power gamers or "pro" gamers (ie. no lifers)
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a robot foot stomping on a human face -- forever."
Disregarding all the prior discussion in this thread my answer to this would be camp check. Of course it has it's problems but all things considered I think it's better than instances.
I remember when EQ added the instanced "Lost dungeons of Norrath". Those dungeons were ok I guess but by instancing them they lost much of the "EQ" feel of the game. It made it all feel so...artificial. Well ok, everything in these games is artificial but by separating people in private instances the game really does lose any sort of <world> feeling it might have otherwise had.
And encountering other people in a shared world is really what mmorpgs are all about. Yes, there are problems and bad things about it but that's just the nature of sharing your playground with other people. You have to take the good with the bad. This trend we have now of games using more and more instancing is completely destroying the entire concept that mmorpgs were originally based on and that was/is the idea of putting thousands of players together in one shared world.
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>.
Ok, so having people sharing the same world creates problems? Alright, so try to find ways to improve it. Don't take the easy way out and destroy what mmorpgs are supposed to be in the first place.
When was this? I played original WoW, and I recall there not being many camps (I don't think WoW has any real camps). Actually to level in original WoW, you would just go around grinding the same World PVE content.
YES, there were open world named mobs that dropped blue or epic loot. I remember hunting for a few of them.
I wouldn't say that WoW provided camps that were at the same level of quality as other MMORPGs. Where were rare spawns, with good loot tables, etc.? They weren't there. There is no world PVE content in original WoW that had comparable loot to instance loot.
Spawn camping is the opposite of quality gaming. What exactly is a quality experience about sitting in one spot for HOURS killing the exact same mobs over ad over again. Pull, taunt, sit around for 5 minutes, ect. You can't understand why people find that incredibly boring now? World bosses dropped epic loot, so you're wrong=) Random epics DID drop off of random mobs, so your'e wrong. Where do you think the BOE purples on the AH came from=)
Had they populated World zones with high quality loot, there would have been more people camping stuff in the world. It just was never there.
Wrong=)
Original WoW and WoW to this day consists of the following:
World content with bad loot tables
Instanced content with good loot tables
So it was never an issue of people voting, they never had camps in WoW and they still don't. Why would anyone farm World content for inferior exp and inferior loot?
Open world was mostly designed for solo play with some opportunities to group up. Open world dungeon-like areas like those bug caves, temples and elite areas were in every 20+ zone.
YES, dungeons provided the better quality content overall, but that was by design. Dungeons were harder and offered better loot. The open world was easier and offered mostly average loot except for those random epic drops & world bosses. The harder content had better rewards. How is that a problem? People who are still stuck 10 years ago trying to play newer games, in WOW's case not even new anymore. They're the problem. CHutes and Ladders was fun too when I first started playing board games. Now, not so fun anymore. Thats spawn camping...an old retired gameplay dynamic no one really wants anymore.
That sounds like such a horrible game design that I can't picture anything but the most diehard of EQ flagellates finding that remotely likable.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Why not have both?
If Im not mistaken Aion went this route. So did Vanguard in the long run in a roundabout sort of way. With their raid dungeons.
I personally like instancing if done correctly,. However most games that have added instancing or have both completely kill the open world content off. IE no one does it.
I remember back in EQ1 added its instancing. If I remember correctly it was the Lost Dungeons of Norrath expansion. I absolutely loved it at first. However one of the things I noticed happened after they added it was that it was alot harder to get outside nonstanced groups going because of it. Which would kinda suck if you were wanting to go after an item that dropped off that named boss. However in an instance everyone would get something usually and people stopped caring about grouping just to group for the sake of having fun with friends.
This leads me to the negative of instancing. Instancing in my view kills the community. I cant count the amount of times that I have finished an instance and people just drop the group sometimes without so much as a goodbye.
While its a good thing that everyone has a better chance of recieving something out of instance. They seem to promote the GREED that plagues gamers these days. That is come get what you want finish the instance and leave.
Dont get me wrong you can make friends on instancing. It just doesnt seem to form the bonds you get when doing open world content where people gather sure to go after things they need. But also gather to just hang out and have a good time
Find a good mix would be my opininion. Vanguard had it right. Open world dungeons with their multi shard raid dungeons.
I like the idea of RARE (and i do mean RARE) world bosses being on a LOOONG world timer. Like the dragons in old EQ... Where the loot they could drop would actually be RARE... meaning not everyone and their brother had it. .... .And when you saw someone wielding it or wearing it you would be like WOW... that item is awesome.
Instancing creates to many carbon copies everyone has the same damn thing.
And quit generalizing about what people want. Just because you want your MMORPG to end up like Diablo 2 or Guildwars doesn't mean other players want it.
Many people want to bring back an open world without usage of instancing. There are a lot of other problems that involve instancing too, how do you have a fun and open PvP server when you provide all of your content in instances? No one has a will to PvP on those servers, they can't fight each other over anything.
With the popularity of WOW, guildwar and the new cross realm dungeon grps in WOW, i would say a lot of players want instancing + Diablo type lobby dungeoning.
And the "problem" is not that great because few wants open PvP server. In fact, no one complains (and many cheers) when wow is moving to a more instanced based pvp model.
Camp check is painful but I remember EQ1 back in the day when even if someone was holding the camp and you wanted to be next in line just hanging out with them was enjoyable and added a social aspect to the game. Plus the simple fact that you respected their camp and was willing to help out to get them their item would give you quite a good reputation of not being a douche bag.
When instances first started showing up I was thinking YEA woo I finally get to go some place with out camp checking... but I will be alone
.
Instances: Player Functional
Camp Check: Player Sociable
camp check
Why does it have to be one or the other? A mixture of both is what I find to be the most entertaining. Although, I suppose if I had to choose it would be instances for me. As much as I loved EQ I can deal without the days of camp checks, trains, and squabbling over camps myself.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I agree that a mixture of both is what is needed. There is no reason that we should be required to choose one style or the other. One of the things I remember most about playing EQ was camping mobs on an 18 hour spawn cycle just to get a specific item with a 33% drop rate.
This kind of gameplay is what makes certain types of gear (Special).
I do enjoy instances, but I would love to see a game that injected a roughly 25%-35% instanced gameplay system, with the majority of the rest being Camp Checked game play.
I do believe that too many instances can suck a large portion of the sense of Comunity out of a good MMO. Sometimes it is just as cool to watch a badass group of higher skill players drop a wicked mob, as it is to drop the wicked mob yourself. In the military medical profession we call that system "See One Do One Teach One".
BoB
Both instanced and persistant content have their good and bad points and their good and bad uses. Since I began my MMO playing with EQ in '99 I am partial to persistant content so keep that in mind as I try to contribute to this debate.
In my very first day of playing EQ I was in the east commonlands fighting the lower level mobs but I kept getting killed by the bears and a cleric also soloing there noticed this. I got in a fight with one and it was again getting the best of me so she ran over and started healing and I survived. We grouped up after that and we stayed friends for years adding several more regular friends along the way.
MMOGs are first and foremost a community. Everquest and games like it have changed computer gaming forever and there is no going back now. Persistant content seems, to me, to support and enhance far more social interaction than instanced content ever could. Just take my example above and instead imagine if I were in a solo instance with nobody around to give me a hand (or to hinder my progress but this is another debate).
Instanced content has it's place in MMOGs as well. In EQ, the game at top level could get tedious and boring- especially pre-Kunark. All the 6 man dungeons would be full to the brim and sometines 6 man groups would be "camping" a single mob. Instanced content ensures that there is always something for everyone to do. I know people will argue one way or another about whether the highest end gear and content should be available to only a few people or to everyone but I put myself strongly on the side that since all of the players pay the same price to play then all of the players should have the opportunity to experience all of the content and get all of the gear. Given the history of high-end raiding and the extremely high demand for these areas and their gear, the only way I can see this accomplished currently is with instancing. EQ did this brilliantly with the PoP expansion and for myself and most of the EQ vets I talk to this was EQ's shining moment-barring the instant travel to far off areas(though the instant travel thing is another debate).
Trust me though, I am not at all a nostalgic all out EQ fan. That game had tons of problems and some of the newer games have addressed some of them- but not all. The biggest problem I see with some of the newer games is that they have left behind alot of the things that EQ got right.
So to me an MMOG must contain both persistant and instanced content to both provide a really good gaming experience and keep some old problems to a minimum. The mix of these two areas will eventually be one of the most influential factors on what kind of players play the game and how many of them there are.
Played:EQ,DDO,WoW,EQ2,Eve Online Trial,Fallen Earth,NWN&NWN2
Why does it have to be one or the other? A mixture of both is what I find to be the most entertaining. Although, I suppose if I had to choose it would be instances for me. As much as I loved EQ I can deal without the days of camp checks, trains, and squabbling over camps myself.
Well I think you might be right. However, you could theory test with both play styles in the game and hope players would initialize both aspects of that design. However, if you can go to an instance and "guarantee" items or whatever. So, the people who may enjoy the socializing with "camp checks"; they might be limited in the amount of people who would want to group and camp.
I think a good solution would be to omit the instances and just "zone" dungeons off. But again, I think it really depends on the server constraints for lag issues for a single shard world. I think instances should be the last resort because they do destroy a persistant world.
Disregarding all the prior discussion in this thread my answer to this would be camp check. Of course it has it's problems but all things considered I think it's better than instances.
I remember when EQ added the instanced "Lost dungeons of Norrath". Those dungeons were ok I guess but by instancing them they lost much of the "EQ" feel of the game. It made it all feel so...artificial. Well ok, everything in these games is artificial but by separating people in private instances the game really does lose any sort of <world> feeling it might have otherwise had.
And encountering other people in a shared world is really what mmorpgs are all about. Yes, there are problems and bad things about it but that's just the nature of sharing your playground with other people. You have to take the good with the bad. This trend we have now of games using more and more instancing is completely destroying the entire concept that mmorpgs were originally based on and that was/is the idea of putting thousands of players together in one shared world.
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>.
Ok, so having people sharing the same world creates problems? Alright, so try to find ways to improve it. Don't take the easy way out and destroy what mmorpgs are supposed to be in the first place.
You sir hit the nail on the head. I'd rather take another course then the instance based route. My idea for an mmorpg would actually bring back the essentials of what the mmorpgs are missing now. Pretty much everything pre wow. However, I am modifing those play styles and designs where they make more sense and improve the world that the players live in.
Well, there are ways to entice people to play both styles through quests, varied loot from both play areas, etc. Of course, that all makes it more time consuming for the developer, but in the end can lead to some excellent entertainment value for those that like both play styles yet provide both styles of content for those that simply prefer one over the other. Which in turn, least in my opinion, increases the potential draw of your product from potential customers.
The one problem with completely open areas is the farming or powerleveling to be had by high levels jacking up areas for low level players since they can kill things extra quick compared to those trying to do the content at the appropriate level. Not an issue really on PvP servers but on PvE servers it can make content virtually unplayable unless certain measures aren't taken to address this type of behavior. For whatever reason, you didn't seem to see a lot of this back in the day but now a days this is a rather common occurrence in open area content when there aren't any parameters set to curb this. Although, I suppose if your goal is just to have PvP server play than it's a non issue but that within itself would limit the audience of your game.
EDIT: Pardon me if this post doesn't make a lot of sense heh. I have a killer headache right now so for all I know what i'm writing could be all over the map. Bleh
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
Camp check.
Also an old school EQ'er....but that isn't completely my reason for choosing this over instancing. Although instances can be nice to avoid random player KS's, trains, etc....it takes away from the MMORPG feel of an open world and community interaction. For me personally, that kills the immersion and fun of playing an MMO. Otherwise, it is a heavily instanced world like another infamous game and may as well be a single player console RPG. Except I end up paying much more than $50-$60 bucks to play it from start to finish like a sucker.
That sounds like such a horrible game design that I can't picture anything but the most diehard of EQ flagellates finding that remotely likable.
I do not think that many people posting on this thread really understand what is meant by a 'camp check system'. They think it is just a 'camp-grind' system
Instances; I have fond memories of WoW btw and I didn't start my MMO career there. Actually, back in 2002 when instancing wasn't an issue at all I had a long and harsh discussion about how camp checks suck and how cool it would be if you could just go somewhere and know what you're facing...
... so yea, I'm not a spoiled greenhorn, I'm just not glorifying a system that sucked 10 years ago as much as it sucks now
M
Depends on the game honestly. If the game has mechanics in place which promote the ability to sit in one spot to pull mobs for XP, then obviously I would prefer a camp system over instancing, but if the game is more about dungeon crawls, I would rather see instancing, so I don't have to worry about some group stealing my kills or camping a mob my group may need.
Honestly though, sometimes I do miss XP camps. It's a lot more relaxing to simply sit back in a single camp than constantly be on the move "all the time." I like dungeons and run through them quite frequently, but sometimes I'd just like to sit back and let the XP roll. I sorta miss the old EQ system with the LDoNs sometimes. I think back in those days, the dungeon crawl vs camp mechanic was divided perfectly.
I'll never get this attitude - at all. I remember so many occasions when some random a** stole kills that were on a 4, 5 hour respawn timer or idiots that trained multiple adds into your AE spells.
Actually for me it always was the other way around, I approach a heavily crowded dungeon/location and there are already people fighting left and right, some areas have just been emptied so they look as if they should be crowded with evil villains but aren't. Then you stand somewhere and half the room respawns right under your butt.
I mean OUR group is on the quest to take out the trash in the fallen caverns of death, not a bunch of random idiots that turn the caverns into a subway station.
As I already said, even back then these were only some of the many reasons i hated free-for-all-mobs of any kind.
M
The game I'm playing has camp checks which is the best in an open world environment.
The more these games go down the instancing path the more they lose that most essential qualification of actually being a mmorpg. That qualifacation being <thousands of people playing in the SAME world>.
Who says what should be essential? In my view, anything that adds to the fun is good.
You won't be able to make frds or socialize with thousands of people anyway. I am in a pretty big guild and I probably have time to know may be 1-2 dozen players. It makes zero difference to me if the world is populated with 500 people or 50000 people.
Plus, I really don't want to wait in line with 50 others .. that breaks immersion more than anything else. Have you ever heard/seen/watch a fantasy story where a party of heroes goes into a dungeon, take a number behind 50 others to take a shot at a dragon?
Plus, massive != massive EVERYWHERE in the world. It is enough for me if there are lots of people in major cities (which is the case in many MMORPGs). There is no need to make dungeons as crowded as cities.
There is NOTHING you cannot do in a normal camp party that you get from a RAID.
I think people are sort of reacting to some sort of stigma in their attitude towards raiding ,i think they think it is like the Olympics or something lol.Like i already said you can achieve the EXACT same thing in a camp,so why bother with instances?
SIMPLE answer is it is a heck of a lot easier for a developer to make instances,they are a cheap form of mapping.You are also removed from the community and the game world,so it really is a dumb idea.Many of the older cheaper game engines had to use instances,they could not handle one large sized world.
When i play a game whatever it is say WOW for example,i login to play WOW,i do not login to romper room through a bunch of square boxes some mapper made,and that is exactly what instances are.I want t o feel i am part of the game world and doing things that matter in the game world,instances are removing one self from the game world and offer nothing to the game world.They are just a cheap way for a developer to add a BOSS zone.
Maybe the BIGGEST factor that makes Raiding a joke?75% of the players can do whatever the heck they want,they are not important to the raid at all,they can nuke away or throw heals around with no purpose,they can melee with no care in the world,and MOST Raids have more than one tank,so you can be a failure and still win lol.
So i don't know if easy mode and an innocent bystander is FUN,so be it,i find the challenge of a normal group to be much more steady fun as every player in the group matters and one tank goes down your party has a good chance of dying ,that IS fun and excitement.The majority are ONLY doing an instance for loot anyhow,the instance itself is a boring joke,remove the loot then tell me how much fun it is ..nada zilch.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Depends on the game. If the people shape the world like in EvE or you need many players to keep the game mechanic running like in WAR population is king.
But for a pure, classic PvE game (like EQ) it doesn't matter at - all. You need your 25 guildies and that's pretty much it...
M
Yeah, people competing over real resources break immersion, as opposed to people having a copy of everything and not sharing the same zones with each other.
What world are you living in? Because in the real world, there are no instances. People compete over real resources. You don't have infinite copies of everything each in their own alternate reality.
I came from a game with no instancing, and I knew every person on my server.. level 1-60. That was a real MMORPG, called Everquest.
What you have now, is Lobby of Warcraft. Tons of useless shared zones: Cities, newbie zones, etc. Anything important in the game is instanced. How is that different from Diablo 2, picking and choosing what rooms you want to go into? It isn't. It isn't an MMORPG, period.
Difference between a real MMORPG and a failure MMORPG wannabe is that in a real MMORPG you share a world and share resources. You know people on your server, the people on your server matter, PvP on your server matters, PvE on your server matters.
Instancing ruins immersion, ruins any chance of that game having a good and open World PVP system, and it leads to welfare epics.
Games with instances shouldn't be bought if they are going to be labeled as MMORPGs. Maybe when they label them single player games or instance-based RPGs or some other name to make it obvious.. then I won't care. But really, to call any game with instancing an MMORPG is beyond idiotic.
Aye.
True, you had some asshats who would KS, or the random idiot who didn't know how to play very well that would train through mobs trying to save their own hides...but for me at least, it was also part of the fun, and is what separated the good players from the bad. You learned where the best spots to avoid such mishaps were, the patterns/tendencies of certain mobs, etc, etc.
Not like today's MMO's, where a large majority of a given server's populace reach top lvl and STILL don't know how to play there classes because they can blow through content in a month or less without breaking a sweat. Mot play exclusively in instances and have no idea how to play their classes, how their classes compliment other classes in combat, etc. Open worlds SHOULD mean free-for-all mobs. Not mobs that cater to an individual player. It's when dev's started catering to the whiny masses that MMO's started a downward spiral of mediocracy.
Don't get me wrong... again, instancing has it's merits, but for me, at the end of the day when it comes to a MMORPG, it should be story driven, adventurous, have meaningful quests (Long and story driven, possibly even chain quests...not a billion "Kill/Collect X" amount quests), and give you a feeling of satisfaction and attachment to your character through the dedication and effort put into developing it over a long period of time, while competing with other players (Not only in PvP, but strictly PvE worlds via resources, etc). An open world with some of the harshness of (somewhat) real world effects provides that more so than allowing players to shut themselves out almost entirely from the rest of the community via their own personal instance so they can get phat lootz in an hour or so and look like everyone else.
Too many want instances and instant gratification aspects. MMORPG's (at least were) suppose to be long games that took time to develop a character in. It made you appreciate your character more, grow attached to it, not as much it's items. Getting past those difficult mobs, zones, travel areas, etc were an accomplishment in itself that brought satisfaction. But...just wasting breath...