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.
Instances don't change things the way you say. And they DO exist in the real world.
All instances are is a bit of the world that you can't get to while the 'interesting' thing happens. To suggest the real world doesn't have instances is to suggest you can get everywhere in the world when the interesting things happens. Which we all know there are millions of places that you can't get to until the instance has run its course. I will admit that there is a difference in that most instances disappear in the game world, but really, even if they would keep it open, it wouldn't affect gameplay, and so doesn't really matter as a significant difference.
For example, Moria was an instance. It was blocked off by a rockslide so no one could intefere with the Fellowship. There is a meeting of 2 aliens right now on Mars, can you get there right now? No, its pretty much an instance. Theres going to be a meeting at my office in 4 hours, you won't be able to get in there either.
Obviously, since there are instances in the real world, that doesn't mean that we don't share resources or anything.
Anyway, i call BS on your knowing everyone in your server. There were too many people (at least on my server) to know. Indeed, a good chunk of them only played while i was asleep.
An instance means I log on and have fun. Camp check means I might have fun, after wasting a lot of time searching for it. (The search for fun is nearly always less fun than the fun itself.) ...
I can say its opposing for me. Going only to hack and slash become boring very fast for me. The most fun I have in any MMO was when I face some challenges like finding a good spot.
Also do not see the massive aspect in the instances. In general I think most peoples do not like the "massive" aspect of MMOs. Thats why last years games go instanced.
The only thing I still do not understand why peoples think they play MMO if they just play monthly subscription multiplayer game.
Where themepark games try to hide that they are copying WOW, games like Mortal Online and Darkfall make no attempt to hide their inspiration ______\m/_____ LordOfDarkDesire
Betwixt and between. Camp check can be annoying, when everything is full. And instancing was always a no go in a MMO for me. I'd say big enough dungeons, noninstanced of course.
Originally posted by Eronakis 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?
Camp check. Instances have been overused in the later MMO gens. Some instances are not a bad idea but it just gets too much.
after trying both, i have to go with instancing, unless there are means to force a group off a 'camp', especially in the case of bosses who drop rare loot with a long respawn timer. This could be from pvp or other means. I just dont want to have to wait hours for a boss to spawn, while i can do nothing else, for a chance to tag it before anyone else.
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.
The reason people are doing instances in wow is because it offers the best rewards per time spent ratio. If grinding world mobs was more rewarding then grinding heroics, that is what a majority of players would be doing.
If blizzard would offer world group content with an equal reward / time spent ratio, alot of people would stop doing heroics.
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.
LOL .. you know EVERYONE in EQ on your server, all 20k of them .. I played EQ too .. don't make me laugh.
And it is fail to compare a GAME to real world. I suppose you throw fireballs in real world too?
And who cares what games are labelled as long as they are fun. Camping is just a failed feature and I don't see developers stupid enough to go back to that.
If you don't like it, you don't have to play instanced games. There are plenty who like it.
I prefer instnaces but can work with a 'camping' system. On the other hand 'camp check' is just horrible design that only works because it systematically forces casual players out of the game.
I prefer instnaces but can work with a 'camping' system. On the other hand 'camp check' is just horrible design that only works because it systematically forces casual players out of the game.
It does not really work. It was there because in the days of EQ, there aren't really alternatives. Once there are other games (i.e. choices), it went way of the dinosaurs.
What I mean by that is sure put your Instances in there for good fast fun. and a chance for decent pieces of gear. But put some of the best drops in the game in open world dungeons with open world bosses with long spawn timers. That way there would be some really good RARE drops.
If you did both you could cater to 2 types of crowds. IE the crowd that wants some good fast dungeon crawling with a high chance of getting a decent reward. Also the crowd that wants a massive open world dungeon with multiple groups playing within it and some very hard named mobs with place holders that people could get together and enjoy longer group sessions where they can actually make friends and hope something good drops.
I could see set armors having a mix of both IE you get most of the pieces for the set of armor out of an instance but maybe the BreastPlate/ Chest piece come from a RARE WORLD boss mob that has people and groups competing for it.
One of the things, I think we can all agree with is that as the devs continue to make these games more accessible and easy to aquire things. The faster we fly thru their content, always feeling like we need more. Something I personally believe world dungeons did was make it where people get together and enjoy the area for far longer periods of time. Rather than well I finished this instance after my 2nd time there what do I do next.
I spent so many days and nights down in Lower guk in EQ1 back in the old days. And I actually enjoyed the time I spent there. But back when i played WOW. When I finished an instance for like the 2nd or 3rd time I was always looking to move to another area. It just had a different feel.
One of the things open world dungeons add to game play is a sense of not knowing whats going to happen next. Especially when you throw in the fact other players are effecting your gameplay. I sit here reading people complaining about trains and such. Well that was unpredictability. where instancing is predictable once you ran its always the same for the most part. Also some of those trains while they could be annoying they did create some of the greatest memories in gaming.
I cant think of how many fun times i had at the entrance of karnors castle laughing about the trains. Or when you run in there and Crush a train. Ohh what fun.
It's impossible to be immersed into a game when there's 100+ other people casually sitting around at various points of the castle, dungeon, or area playing "WHACK-A-MOLE" with predictable pops/spawns, and spam LFG <level> <class> for a few hours till I was needed.
I prefer the virgin feel to an area when my group explores it. If I'm going to said "Castle of Doom" it adds more immersion if there are guards at the gates, and the castle was populated with NPC's to attack, rather than the feel of some MMO tent city with empty content.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
It depends on if you feel you will be able to compete with WoW in terms of polish and marketing, if you can go down the instanced route and try going toe to toe. A "niche" non instanced game could easily support a population to make it considered a successful MMO from a business point of view. You'll also have a much more loyal customer base who won't just jump to the next instance only McMMO.
A non instanced, real world mmo you will need a lot more content, and to create content at a faster fate so people don't get bottlenecked into your premier dungeon/raid zones (that is the reason wow went the instanced route by offering only a handful of dungeons allowing people to repeat ad infinitum) With that content you will have a much more fun world to play in. Keep the world fresh and fun and that is the way to a great game.
Ignore the muppets complaining of lines of 100 groups all lining up for 1 boss, it simply doesn't work like that and is just the fears from players who have never considered a non-instanced mmo. Provide enough content and people won't be limited to queueing up for a shot at a spawn.
Having non-instancing doesn't mean you can't have scripted encounters. If a group performs certain a task to summon the Big Bad Boss X of a dungeon (be it loot item y, or kill z snotlings or something a lot more involved and story driven for the premier bosses and loot) make Big Bad Boss X locked to the group who spawned it. That way you can make the "better" designed content tougher (unzergable), dropping higher quality loot without the risk of people trying to contest other peoples camps. You can also control the risk/reward levels so people don't fall along the path of least effort to get the best rewards. Having a dungeon of loot pinatas which people can repeatedly bash until they get the shiny object of their desires is not fun content.
Allowing groups to cooperate inside a premier dungeon for a final 2 group encounter, for better rewards in return for more work and higher risk is another option open to the designer of a dungeon, allow groups to help each other and you suddenly turn a commuity from something that someone might see as a rival to an ally (after all both groups are here to stop the evil lord of castle blablabla) I don't mean have a guy at the end of the dungeon with a "please kill me" sign around his neck, but make the act of summoning require work from both groups independant of each other.
I would say it was equally impossible to feel immersed in a world consisting of just your group, if there is 2 or 3 groups in a dungeon with enough content to accomodate them all it actually make the place feel alive, rather than a sterile souless mob farm. The instances are the empty worlds. There is a section of the comunity who care about "My loot and how long will it take for me to get it" and nothing more, MMOs are the antithesis of what these people want. They merely wan't a large lobby to show their loot of to, without haing to worry about the same community having any effect on them. I'd recomend Diablo 2 to them, of any other similar game.
Don't knock the idea of real world dungeons, they are fun, and the more work you put into them the more fun they will be.
The best dungeons are non-instanced, and not simply camp and grind, but encourage the group to move around the dungeon. Use a bit of imagination and you can make dungeons more fun than either of the extremes of camping a placeholder until a named spawns and a sterile lootpinata fest. Keep your dungeons in the real world (There are a few examples when you might want a group transported to an instanced section in keeping with the story, but I'd keep these to a minimum)
Camp Check all the way. I am sooo tired of being bored not seeing or interacting with anybody other then who is in the instance with you. Instances are the most care bear thing that devs have done to help ruin and totally destroy mmos. Instead of creating instances with all the best drops ingame. Devs should just leave the best drops in the main world on semi rare drops and have all instances for 20+ member raids with like a 2 hour lockout or something. But no I have to be bored having to go through an instance to get to a boss that has a dissapointing drop and feel like I could have gotten that xp and coin doing something more productive like completing quests or PvP. Instances should be for no fewer then 15 people or they are just not at all fun imo. Yes I miss the old days of pre smed EQ and SOE.
I 100% agree.I made a lot of friends an met a lot of great people from having to do camp checks, seek out help, look for other members that need the same items or quests, etc... This all just my opinion of course, but I have yet to play an MMORPG since EQ where I felt truely immersed like the times I spent in places like Black Burrow, Crystal Caverns, etc..
Originally posted by Hillsy Ignore the muppets complaining of lines of 100 groups all lining up for 1 boss, it simply doesn't work like that and is just the fears from players who have never considered a non-instanced mmo. Provide enough content and people won't be limited to queueing up for a shot at a spawn.
If you have enough content that people are not 'queueing up for a shot at a spawn' then you don't actually have a 'camp check' system do you? You do not do camp checks if the areas you want to camp in are free, do you?
Camp Check, inspires more socializing and gives an actual game world feel, instead of some silly Diablo thing.
Also, if you design things well, there will never be a need to check for a camp, or if one camp is filled, there will be another one just as good. Don't make low end items so insanely powerful that people need to line up for them, or give them a random chance to drop in many places in the dungeon, not just from a boss. Or, make it so that the item grind isn't the point of the game, then people won't worry about camping bosses.
Camp Check, inspires more socializing and gives an actual game world feel, instead of some silly Diablo thing. Also, if you design things well, there will never be a need to check for a camp, or if one camp is filled, there will be another one just as good. Don't make low end items so insanely powerful that people need to line up for them, or give them a random chance to drop in many places in the dungeon, not just from a boss. Or, make it so that the item grind isn't the point of the game, then people won't worry about camping bosses.
Basically, do what DAoC did :P
You are confusing the heck out of me.
You first say that a 'camp check' system is good but then go to say that it is good game design to eliminate it. Make up your mind.
Camp Check, inspires more socializing and gives an actual game world feel, instead of some silly Diablo thing.
Diablo >>> EQ as a fun game. I would MUCH rather PLAY Diablo than waiting for 30 min doing NOTHING except chatting (which i can do on MSN) waiting to kill the boss.
The best dungeons are non-instanced, and not simply camp and grind, but encourage the group to move around the dungeon. Use a bit of imagination and you can make dungeons more fun than either of the extremes of camping a placeholder until a named spawns and a sterile lootpinata fest.
Right, like I said before people should try to think of ways to improve on shared world content. Just because a game doesn't use instancing it doesn't necessarily mean that everything has to work exactly like it did in older games. One of the great failings of mmorpg devs over the past several years is that they've been using instancing as a crutch and haven't even been attempting to improve on the shared world design. It's just so much easier to separate people and give everyone a separate little world to play in than it is to find ways to make sharing the same world work better.
But with dungeons for example; you could have shared, persistant dungeons but design them to encourage dungeon crawling rather than spawn camping. One way to do this would be to simply not have any rewards for killing most mobs in the dungeon but put all the rewards on just certain key mobs deep within the dungeon. So the goal and the challenge would be getting to those key mobs. But after killing one you can no longer get any reward from that mob again untill you've left the dungeon.
So groups (or soloers) would work their way through the dungeon to reach the key mobs, kill them, and then having no reason to hang around in that spot they would continue through to the next key mob (if more than one in that dungeon) and then they would have to work their way out again. Once outside they could go back through again if they wanted and could once again get rewards.
Now have extremely short respawn timers on all mobs so the the dungeon is never devoid of mobs (you would probably need some relatively safe spots to rest if they game requires any sort of recover time after a tough fight). Make it a big sprawling place that takes some time to go through. Now you can have multiple groups working their way through the dungeon simultaneously and they won't be competing over the common mobs because there are no rewards for killing the common mobs. And they won't compete for the key mobs because once one group kills it they have to leave before they can get a reward for killing it again. At worst one group might have to wait a minute or two for the group ahead to wrap up their business with one of the key mobs.
But now you could have lots of people working their way through the same dungeon at the same time. Running into each other sometimes. Maybe helping each other out sometimes. Maybe two guys tried to duo and decided it's too much to handle and they come across a group which is short two people and they join forces. Maybe you come across a group which got wiped out and your cleric decides to be nice and rez them. Maybe sometimes people cause some problems for each other like with trains and such but that's all part of the social experience which is completely lacking in heavily instanced games.
With something like this (not saying this is the greatest idea ever but at least it's an attempt) you could retain the "world" feel of persistant shared content and the social/community aspect while not relying on spawn camping and camp checking.
The best dungeons are non-instanced, and not simply camp and grind, but encourage the group to move around the dungeon. Use a bit of imagination and you can make dungeons more fun than either of the extremes of camping a placeholder until a named spawns and a sterile lootpinata fest.
Right, like I said before people should try to think of ways to improve on shared world content. Just because a game doesn't use instancing it doesn't necessarily mean that everything has to work exactly like it did in older games. One of the great failings of mmorpg devs over the past several years is that they've been using instancing as a crutch and haven't even been attempting to improve on the shared world design. It's just so much easier to separate people and give everyone a separate little world to play in than it is to find ways to make sharing the same world work better.
Most of your suggestions will just result in a group camping a dungeon, instead of camping a spawn. This isn't much better.
Thats just like when DAOC had bonuses that went away over time, people stopped camping spawns and just camped an area. Not that huge an improvement.
Short spawn timers remove the idea that the character made a difference. The longer the spawn timer the better.
The best dungeons work where you only need/want to go through it once, and everything gets cleared and stays cleared.
Comments
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.
Instances don't change things the way you say. And they DO exist in the real world.
All instances are is a bit of the world that you can't get to while the 'interesting' thing happens. To suggest the real world doesn't have instances is to suggest you can get everywhere in the world when the interesting things happens. Which we all know there are millions of places that you can't get to until the instance has run its course. I will admit that there is a difference in that most instances disappear in the game world, but really, even if they would keep it open, it wouldn't affect gameplay, and so doesn't really matter as a significant difference.
For example, Moria was an instance. It was blocked off by a rockslide so no one could intefere with the Fellowship. There is a meeting of 2 aliens right now on Mars, can you get there right now? No, its pretty much an instance. Theres going to be a meeting at my office in 4 hours, you won't be able to get in there either.
Obviously, since there are instances in the real world, that doesn't mean that we don't share resources or anything.
Anyway, i call BS on your knowing everyone in your server. There were too many people (at least on my server) to know. Indeed, a good chunk of them only played while i was asleep.
I think you have heard the anwer already:
Given choice, people will go to instances instead of camp.
Camps work if people enjoy playing, once they are only after loot you will have hostile intrusions.
Instances are much easier to scale properly, much easier on server, and much easier to make narrative.
You can find updated version of camp checks in WAR - public quest. Great idea that breaks oh so easily.
If you want to go with yesterday tested and proved technolgy, instancing all the way. Still, both are getting obsolete.
I can say its opposing for me. Going only to hack and slash become boring very fast for me. The most fun I have in any MMO was when I face some challenges like finding a good spot.
Also do not see the massive aspect in the instances. In general I think most peoples do not like the "massive" aspect of MMOs. Thats why last years games go instanced.
The only thing I still do not understand why peoples think they play MMO if they just play monthly subscription multiplayer game.
Where themepark games try to hide that they are copying WOW, games like Mortal Online and Darkfall make no attempt to hide their inspiration
______\m/_____
LordOfDarkDesire
Instanceing, it will keep more subscribers. business 101
MAGA
Betwixt and between. Camp check can be annoying, when everything is full. And instancing was always a no go in a MMO for me. I'd say big enough dungeons, noninstanced of course.
Camp check. Instances have been overused in the later MMO gens. Some instances are not a bad idea but it just gets too much.
Camp checks also have some RPG potential.
after trying both, i have to go with instancing, unless there are means to force a group off a 'camp', especially in the case of bosses who drop rare loot with a long respawn timer. This could be from pvp or other means. I just dont want to have to wait hours for a boss to spawn, while i can do nothing else, for a chance to tag it before anyone else.
The reason people are doing instances in wow is because it offers the best rewards per time spent ratio. If grinding world mobs was more rewarding then grinding heroics, that is what a majority of players would be doing.
If blizzard would offer world group content with an equal reward / time spent ratio, alot of people would stop doing heroics.
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.
LOL .. you know EVERYONE in EQ on your server, all 20k of them .. I played EQ too .. don't make me laugh.
And it is fail to compare a GAME to real world. I suppose you throw fireballs in real world too?
And who cares what games are labelled as long as they are fun. Camping is just a failed feature and I don't see developers stupid enough to go back to that.
If you don't like it, you don't have to play instanced games. There are plenty who like it.
I prefer instnaces but can work with a 'camping' system. On the other hand 'camp check' is just horrible design that only works because it systematically forces casual players out of the game.
It does not really work. It was there because in the days of EQ, there aren't really alternatives. Once there are other games (i.e. choices), it went way of the dinosaurs.
Like I said before. A good mix of both is best.
What I mean by that is sure put your Instances in there for good fast fun. and a chance for decent pieces of gear. But put some of the best drops in the game in open world dungeons with open world bosses with long spawn timers. That way there would be some really good RARE drops.
If you did both you could cater to 2 types of crowds. IE the crowd that wants some good fast dungeon crawling with a high chance of getting a decent reward. Also the crowd that wants a massive open world dungeon with multiple groups playing within it and some very hard named mobs with place holders that people could get together and enjoy longer group sessions where they can actually make friends and hope something good drops.
I could see set armors having a mix of both IE you get most of the pieces for the set of armor out of an instance but maybe the BreastPlate/ Chest piece come from a RARE WORLD boss mob that has people and groups competing for it.
One of the things, I think we can all agree with is that as the devs continue to make these games more accessible and easy to aquire things. The faster we fly thru their content, always feeling like we need more. Something I personally believe world dungeons did was make it where people get together and enjoy the area for far longer periods of time. Rather than well I finished this instance after my 2nd time there what do I do next.
I spent so many days and nights down in Lower guk in EQ1 back in the old days. And I actually enjoyed the time I spent there. But back when i played WOW. When I finished an instance for like the 2nd or 3rd time I was always looking to move to another area. It just had a different feel.
One of the things open world dungeons add to game play is a sense of not knowing whats going to happen next. Especially when you throw in the fact other players are effecting your gameplay. I sit here reading people complaining about trains and such. Well that was unpredictability. where instancing is predictable once you ran its always the same for the most part. Also some of those trains while they could be annoying they did create some of the greatest memories in gaming.
I cant think of how many fun times i had at the entrance of karnors castle laughing about the trains. Or when you run in there and Crush a train. Ohh what fun.
Instanced. Here is why...
It's impossible to be immersed into a game when there's 100+ other people casually sitting around at various points of the castle, dungeon, or area playing "WHACK-A-MOLE" with predictable pops/spawns, and spam LFG <level> <class> for a few hours till I was needed.
I prefer the virgin feel to an area when my group explores it. If I'm going to said "Castle of Doom" it adds more immersion if there are guards at the gates, and the castle was populated with NPC's to attack, rather than the feel of some MMO tent city with empty content.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
It depends on if you feel you will be able to compete with WoW in terms of polish and marketing, if you can go down the instanced route and try going toe to toe. A "niche" non instanced game could easily support a population to make it considered a successful MMO from a business point of view. You'll also have a much more loyal customer base who won't just jump to the next instance only McMMO.
A non instanced, real world mmo you will need a lot more content, and to create content at a faster fate so people don't get bottlenecked into your premier dungeon/raid zones (that is the reason wow went the instanced route by offering only a handful of dungeons allowing people to repeat ad infinitum) With that content you will have a much more fun world to play in. Keep the world fresh and fun and that is the way to a great game.
Ignore the muppets complaining of lines of 100 groups all lining up for 1 boss, it simply doesn't work like that and is just the fears from players who have never considered a non-instanced mmo. Provide enough content and people won't be limited to queueing up for a shot at a spawn.
Having non-instancing doesn't mean you can't have scripted encounters. If a group performs certain a task to summon the Big Bad Boss X of a dungeon (be it loot item y, or kill z snotlings or something a lot more involved and story driven for the premier bosses and loot) make Big Bad Boss X locked to the group who spawned it. That way you can make the "better" designed content tougher (unzergable), dropping higher quality loot without the risk of people trying to contest other peoples camps. You can also control the risk/reward levels so people don't fall along the path of least effort to get the best rewards. Having a dungeon of loot pinatas which people can repeatedly bash until they get the shiny object of their desires is not fun content.
Allowing groups to cooperate inside a premier dungeon for a final 2 group encounter, for better rewards in return for more work and higher risk is another option open to the designer of a dungeon, allow groups to help each other and you suddenly turn a commuity from something that someone might see as a rival to an ally (after all both groups are here to stop the evil lord of castle blablabla) I don't mean have a guy at the end of the dungeon with a "please kill me" sign around his neck, but make the act of summoning require work from both groups independant of each other.
I would say it was equally impossible to feel immersed in a world consisting of just your group, if there is 2 or 3 groups in a dungeon with enough content to accomodate them all it actually make the place feel alive, rather than a sterile souless mob farm. The instances are the empty worlds. There is a section of the comunity who care about "My loot and how long will it take for me to get it" and nothing more, MMOs are the antithesis of what these people want. They merely wan't a large lobby to show their loot of to, without haing to worry about the same community having any effect on them. I'd recomend Diablo 2 to them, of any other similar game.
Don't knock the idea of real world dungeons, they are fun, and the more work you put into them the more fun they will be.
The best dungeons are non-instanced, and not simply camp and grind, but encourage the group to move around the dungeon. Use a bit of imagination and you can make dungeons more fun than either of the extremes of camping a placeholder until a named spawns and a sterile lootpinata fest. Keep your dungeons in the real world (There are a few examples when you might want a group transported to an instanced section in keeping with the story, but I'd keep these to a minimum)
I 100% agree.I made a lot of friends an met a lot of great people from having to do camp checks, seek out help, look for other members that need the same items or quests, etc... This all just my opinion of course, but I have yet to play an MMORPG since EQ where I felt truely immersed like the times I spent in places like Black Burrow, Crystal Caverns, etc..
A tiny mind is a tidy mind...
If you have enough content that people are not 'queueing up for a shot at a spawn' then you don't actually have a 'camp check' system do you? You do not do camp checks if the areas you want to camp in are free, do you?
Camp Check, inspires more socializing and gives an actual game world feel, instead of some silly Diablo thing.
Also, if you design things well, there will never be a need to check for a camp, or if one camp is filled, there will be another one just as good. Don't make low end items so insanely powerful that people need to line up for them, or give them a random chance to drop in many places in the dungeon, not just from a boss. Or, make it so that the item grind isn't the point of the game, then people won't worry about camping bosses.
Basically, do what DAoC did :P
You are confusing the heck out of me.
You first say that a 'camp check' system is good but then go to say that it is good game design to eliminate it. Make up your mind.
Diablo >>> EQ as a fun game. I would MUCH rather PLAY Diablo than waiting for 30 min doing NOTHING except chatting (which i can do on MSN) waiting to kill the boss.
Right, like I said before people should try to think of ways to improve on shared world content. Just because a game doesn't use instancing it doesn't necessarily mean that everything has to work exactly like it did in older games. One of the great failings of mmorpg devs over the past several years is that they've been using instancing as a crutch and haven't even been attempting to improve on the shared world design. It's just so much easier to separate people and give everyone a separate little world to play in than it is to find ways to make sharing the same world work better.
But with dungeons for example; you could have shared, persistant dungeons but design them to encourage dungeon crawling rather than spawn camping. One way to do this would be to simply not have any rewards for killing most mobs in the dungeon but put all the rewards on just certain key mobs deep within the dungeon. So the goal and the challenge would be getting to those key mobs. But after killing one you can no longer get any reward from that mob again untill you've left the dungeon.
So groups (or soloers) would work their way through the dungeon to reach the key mobs, kill them, and then having no reason to hang around in that spot they would continue through to the next key mob (if more than one in that dungeon) and then they would have to work their way out again. Once outside they could go back through again if they wanted and could once again get rewards.
Now have extremely short respawn timers on all mobs so the the dungeon is never devoid of mobs (you would probably need some relatively safe spots to rest if they game requires any sort of recover time after a tough fight). Make it a big sprawling place that takes some time to go through. Now you can have multiple groups working their way through the dungeon simultaneously and they won't be competing over the common mobs because there are no rewards for killing the common mobs. And they won't compete for the key mobs because once one group kills it they have to leave before they can get a reward for killing it again. At worst one group might have to wait a minute or two for the group ahead to wrap up their business with one of the key mobs.
But now you could have lots of people working their way through the same dungeon at the same time. Running into each other sometimes. Maybe helping each other out sometimes. Maybe two guys tried to duo and decided it's too much to handle and they come across a group which is short two people and they join forces. Maybe you come across a group which got wiped out and your cleric decides to be nice and rez them. Maybe sometimes people cause some problems for each other like with trains and such but that's all part of the social experience which is completely lacking in heavily instanced games.
With something like this (not saying this is the greatest idea ever but at least it's an attempt) you could retain the "world" feel of persistant shared content and the social/community aspect while not relying on spawn camping and camp checking.
Right, like I said before people should try to think of ways to improve on shared world content. Just because a game doesn't use instancing it doesn't necessarily mean that everything has to work exactly like it did in older games. One of the great failings of mmorpg devs over the past several years is that they've been using instancing as a crutch and haven't even been attempting to improve on the shared world design. It's just so much easier to separate people and give everyone a separate little world to play in than it is to find ways to make sharing the same world work better.
Most of your suggestions will just result in a group camping a dungeon, instead of camping a spawn. This isn't much better.
Thats just like when DAOC had bonuses that went away over time, people stopped camping spawns and just camped an area. Not that huge an improvement.
Short spawn timers remove the idea that the character made a difference. The longer the spawn timer the better.
The best dungeons work where you only need/want to go through it once, and everything gets cleared and stays cleared.