i am not sure where this topic is leading to, every mmorpg is instance based, we have seen how shadowbane failed w/o instances......
Well see and that is just wrong. Lineage II had no instancing and it didn't fail. Hell, even crappy WoW doesn't have an instanced world or at least the continents are instances so you as a player don't notice.
Are there open dungeons where you can fight other players over bosses, guys?
From what I have read, yes. There are non-instance dungeons that claim to support more than one adventuring group in them. So I am assuming it will be like EQ, with certain groups in certain areas of the dungeon. As for the channels, I think it's the nicest way of handling the masses in the beginning. So long as they are used as overflow channels and only open up when the population reaches a certain number and closes in much the same way then I have no issue with them at all.
Poor immersion, it has the shortest lifetime in the animal kingdom; everything kills it. Or was it the most exaggeration?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
"TERA is fundamentally an open-world game, though it does have some instanced dungeons because players enjoy them. In the crowded open areas, we’ll split players into separate “channels” of the world during launch so that the game world won’t be too crowded—we’ve got to give the monsters a reasonable chance of surviving, right? But don't worry—you’ll be able to freely switch between the channels so you can stick together with your friends! After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren’t overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
I was excited for this game until I read this quote. Another game instanced to hell yet claiming to be "open world".
Well, play it and make a decisioin. Certainly feels open world to me.
Until the people who are trying the game,and realize it's not for them leave thus creating more room, there will be certain areas that are just crowded. The opted for a certain aesthetic and I think because of that aesthetic things could possibly turn into a slide show.
The only real case where I can see this stuff being a problem is on the pvp servers.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
The game pretty much defaults you to channel 1, except in cases of severe crowding. If you want another channel, in the event of too much competition for monsters, there's usually a second one available. But you're going into that channel under your own power. Things generally have to get fairly crowded before they start auto-redirecting to other channels.
The game itself, save for the instanced dungeons and the two halves of the world on each side of the ocean, is seamless. You can travel between everything and everywhere on foot without seeing a single loading screen. You can see other zones if you look off into the distance from a good vantage point. When you're using the flying horse travel method, you can look down and see the actual mobs and players walking/fighting below you. In this area, the game has nothing to apologize for.
And yes, there are open-world dungeons. We've seen two so far in the betas, one weighted around lvl30, the other around lvl33 or so. They're full of BAM's, bosses, world bosses, and you'll never see a loading screen as you head into them from the open world.
A Modest Proposal for MMORPGs: That the means of progression would not be mutually exclusive from the means of enjoyment.
I am glad they are doing this, and it wont ruin anything, once im level 20 this will hardly be an issue anymore.
That's not how it works in Ktera.
Channels are everywhere save the cities.
People seems to forget that Tera is already out and tested in Korea since early 2011.
Except if EME said they take out channels if needed and we all know they have the ability to do that....
This. I would rather them use channels the first couple months and have a correct amount of servers than to merge them later on because they spread servers out to handle the influx of players at launch. They already said they would consider removing them if it makes sense.
Also, there is a huge difference between instancing and channels. Instances make you zone, channels you choose to. TERA is not like EQ2 and Aion in that regard. If you don't think channels make a world "seemless" just don't change channels. Even if you change a channel in one area once you pass into another you get automatically switched to channel 1.
This is a smaller matter but can anyone say there are channels in "every" zone other than cities or is it just the earlier zones?
I am glad they are doing this, and it wont ruin anything, once im level 20 this will hardly be an issue anymore.
That's not how it works in Ktera.
Channels are everywhere save the cities.
People seems to forget that Tera is already out and tested in Korea since early 2011.
Except if EME said they take out channels if needed and we all know they have the ability to do that....
Promises. I trust only facts.
And right now in Korea the channels are everywhere.
I don't see why KTERA will use instanced channels and EME Tera won't. The only good reasons would be that the population issue won't be as big here in the west but this means the game population isn't doing well so it's not something i'm hoping for.
Originally posted by Deron_Barak
This is a smaller matter but can anyone say there are channels in "every" zone other than cities or is it just the earlier zones?
It's not a smaller matter imho.
And yes the channels are everywhere in KTera from earlier zones to the endgame areas, just not in the cities. It depends on the population distribution in those areas.
PvE servers should be fine with this set-up for NA/EU, But I wonder how they are going to do it on the PvP servers or will that part be the same.
I don't see it as a problem in PvP servers either (although I'd consider thouse hybrid, since no server for this type of MMOs is PvP only).
Lets think about what can happen in a battleground, which is essencially a mini-zone. Lets say that a mini-zone holds 20 players per side, 40 total. Now you allow 100 players per side, total 200 so as not to allow instancing. While the game was fun and challenging in the 20x20 population limit, the 100x100 suddenly becomes a zerg rush, considering the confined space and the mass of people.
Bottom line, PvP servers will be just fine even with instancing. Well, unless you're hunting for specific people to PK.
Or if you have territorial control, which will be meaningless since you can just go to another instance which is not controlled.
Territorial control is not done like it is in DF. Control will be in the hands of the lords & kings, and those will come from and supported by guilds.
And will the control be in all instances of the same zone or how does it work?
There will be no instances when the game becomes about territorial control. This is a LAUNCH FEATURE. Period. By the time most people are at endgame, they won't need the channels anymore.
PvE servers should be fine with this set-up for NA/EU, But I wonder how they are going to do it on the PvP servers or will that part be the same.
I don't see it as a problem in PvP servers either (although I'd consider thouse hybrid, since no server for this type of MMOs is PvP only).
Lets think about what can happen in a battleground, which is essencially a mini-zone. Lets say that a mini-zone holds 20 players per side, 40 total. Now you allow 100 players per side, total 200 so as not to allow instancing. While the game was fun and challenging in the 20x20 population limit, the 100x100 suddenly becomes a zerg rush, considering the confined space and the mass of people.
Bottom line, PvP servers will be just fine even with instancing. Well, unless you're hunting for specific people to PK.
Or if you have territorial control, which will be meaningless since you can just go to another instance which is not controlled.
Territorial control is not done like it is in DF. Control will be in the hands of the lords & kings, and those will come from and supported by guilds.
And will the control be in all instances of the same zone or how does it work?
There will be no instances when the game becomes about territorial control. This is a LAUNCH FEATURE. Period. By the time most people are at endgame, they won't need the channels anymore.
Except it will end up having channels still albeit probably just a couple but they will definately have 1 channel for the territorial areas. Like Aion where there is different amounts of channels in different areas, the main city for each faction only having 1 channel, and the starting areas having like 6. Even before it went F2P it still had a couple channels in certain areas. But if they do have territorial control they will just have those areas set to 1 channel.
There will be no instances when the game becomes about territorial control. This is a LAUNCH FEATURE. Period. By the time most people are at endgame, they won't need the channels anymore.
Wait .... wha-
Jeez Tera fanboys don't even know their own game? Channels are not a launch feature.
That "launch feature" is right now even in KTera and is instancing the overpopulated end game areas.
Jesus i can't believe people are just outright lying to make their game look good.
There will be no instances when the game becomes about territorial control. This is a LAUNCH FEATURE. Period. By the time most people are at endgame, they won't need the channels anymore.
Wait .... wha-
Jeez Tera fanboys don't even know their own game? Channels are not a launch feature.
That "launch feature" is right now even in KTera and is instancing the overpopulated end game areas.
Jesus i can't believe people are just outright lying to make their game look good.
"TERA is fundamentally an open-world game, though it does have some instanced dungeons because players enjoy them. In the crowded open areas, we’ll split players into separate “channels” of the world during launch so that the game world won’t be too crowded—we’ve got to give the monsters a reasonable chance of surviving, right? But don't worry—you’ll be able to freely switch between the channels so you can stick together with your friends! After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren’t overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
From their website, man. But yeah, I'm lying. This is a feature that a lot of MMOs use at launch. TOR did the same thing. LOTRO does it from time to time when new expansions come out. After the population spreads out, the channels, sharding, layering, or whatever you want to call them get removed. This is S.O.P. for a lot of MMOs these days at launch.
And stop comparing the NA version to the KTERA version. What works there, and what is necessary to do there, is not what is necessary here.
"TERA is fundamentally an open-world game, though it does have some instanced dungeons because players enjoy them. In the crowded open areas, we’ll split players into separate “channels” of the world during launch so that the game world won’t be too crowded—we’ve got to give the monsters a reasonable chance of surviving, right? But don't worry—you’ll be able to freely switch between the channels so you can stick together with your friends! After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren’t overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
I was going to keep an eye on the game until I saw this. I really dislike game instancing like SWTOR has. I'd much rather be in a crowded area than having one instance only hold 100 people or so then another open up. Makes the world feel so dead, and you hardly run across anyone. I don't mind instances for dungeons but when I'm out in the open world or in cities, one thing that will kill my fun is instancing people, dividing them up. I suppose I'll give this one a pass for that reason alone. Maybe check it out in 6 months to a year from release when there's less chance of instancing people up.
"TERA is fundamentally an open-world game, though it does have some instanced dungeons because players enjoy them. In the crowded open areas, we’ll split players into separate “channels” of the world during launch so that the game world won’t be too crowded—we’ve got to give the monsters a reasonable chance of surviving, right? But don't worry—you’ll be able to freely switch between the channels so you can stick together with your friends! After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren’t overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
I was going to keep an eye on the game until I saw this. I really dislike game instancing like SWTOR has. I'd much rather be in a crowded area than having one instance only hold 100 people or so then another open up. Makes the world feel so dead, and you hardly run across anyone. I don't mind instances for dungeons but when I'm out in the open world or in cities, one thing that will kill my fun is instancing people, dividing them up. I suppose I'll give this one a pass for that reason alone. Maybe check it out in 6 months to a year from release when there's less chance of instancing people up.
Well, TOR had those instances up at launch due to the fact that their game engine sucked, and it doesn't seem to be able to hold as many people without issues. They no longer have the sharding anymore, at least on most servers. I'm HOPING that TERA's servers are a bit more stable based on the engine they are using. They seemed that way in the beta I was in, but we'll see.
Either way, they would like to do away with the channels if they aren't needed. That's the point. Hopefully, they won't be needed as the population spreads out. We'll see what happens. I agree that it won't matter much for PvE, but for PvP it would be kind of lame.
There will be no instances when the game becomes about territorial control. This is a LAUNCH FEATURE. Period. By the time most people are at endgame, they won't need the channels anymore.
Wait .... wha-
Jeez Tera fanboys don't even know their own game? Channels are not a launch feature.
That "launch feature" is right now even in KTera and is instancing the overpopulated end game areas.
Jesus i can't believe people are just outright lying to make their game look good.
"TERA is fundamentally an open-world game, though it does have some instanced dungeons because players enjoy them. In the crowded open areas, we’ll split players into separate “channels” of the world during launch so that the game world won’t be too crowded—we’ve got to give the monsters a reasonable chance of surviving, right? But don't worry—you’ll be able to freely switch between the channels so you can stick together with your friends! After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren’t overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
From their website, man. But yeah, I'm lying. This is a feature that a lot of MMOs use at launch. TOR did the same thing. LOTRO does it from time to time when new expansions come out. After the population spreads out, the channels, sharding, layering, or whatever you want to call them get removed. This is S.O.P. for a lot of MMOs these days at launch.
And stop comparing the NA version to the KTERA version. What works there, and what is necessary to do there, is not what is necessary here.
After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren't overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
See? they are not removing them. The channels will be there just like in KTera.
Jeez i have to even tell the obvious...
But since you don't trust facts (KTera endgame zones instanced in channels right now) and instead trust "promises"(heck it's not even promises... they are just fooling you and telling that the channels will be there even after launch as they are supposed to work) from the publisher.
How naive.
Originally posted by Cthulhu23
Either way, they would like to do away with the channels if they aren't needed. That's the point. Hopefully, they won't be needed as the population spreads out. We'll see what happens. I agree that it won't matter much for PvE, but for PvP it would be kind of lame.
No. Did you ever consider that Ktera is out since january 2011?
On a healthy population server there will be channels even at the endgame areas.
If you don't see channels it means the server population is so low that the game doesn't need to instance the area. But that means the game is not doing well.
After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren't overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
See? they are not removing them. The channels will be there just like in KTera.
Jeez i have to even tell the obvious...
But since you don't trust facts (KTera endgame zones instanced in channels right now) and instead trust "promises"(heck it's not even promises... they are just fooling you and telling that the channels will be there even after launch as they are supposed to work) from the publisher.
How naive.
Which is what every single MMO that uses sharding says. If it's not overcrowded...they get rid of them. Doesn't that go without saying? Isn't that the point I was trying to make? It's not a feature that they expect to or want to use for the duration.
And again...KTERA is going to have a lot more use for that kind of thing than the NA version will. As proof, we can compare sub numbers once the game is launched in NA as proof of why they would. Isn't it the 3rd or 4th ranked mmo in South Korea? Have to believe it's got a larger population there than it will here. That won't necessarily be an indication that the server population is exceedingly low, either, since we really don't know how much their servers can hold.
So again...comparing KTERA to TERA in pretty much any capacity is pointless.
You do know that EME can make changes like removing channels right? They have already made changes to NA-TERA that are not in KTERA in order to appease us here in NA. I understand that you see "fact" as what KTERA is right now but this will be a different itteration of the game to a degree of EME's choosing.
After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren't overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
See? they are not removing them. The channels will be there just like in KTera.
Jeez i have to even tell the obvious...
But since you don't trust facts (KTera endgame zones instanced in channels right now) and instead trust "promises"(heck it's not even promises... they are just fooling you and telling that the channels will be there even after launch as they are supposed to work) from the publisher.
How naive.
Which is what every single MMO that uses sharding says. If it's not overcrowded...they get rid of them. Doesn't that go without saying? Isn't that the point I was trying to make? It's not a feature that they expect to or want to use for the duration.
And again...KTERA is going to have a lot more use for that kind of thing than the NA version will. As proof, we can compare sub numbers once the game is launched in NA as proof of why they would. Isn't it the 3rd or 4th ranked mmo in South Korea? Have to believe it's got a larger population there than it will here.
No you said that channels was a "launch feature" and when you get to endgame you won't see it. And that EME will remove them after launch.
BIG LIE
The channels will be there forever and in every overcrowded area of the game except the cities.
When the overcrowded are won't be the starter areas .... the engine will just do its job and create new instances of the endgame areas.
This is how it will work.
Yes it's overall population is 4th in Korea right now but we are not discussing about overall game population here. What matters is the population of the single server.
If you we don't see channels in the high level areas like in KTera you can start to be worried about the health of your server.
You do know that EME can make changes like removing channels right? They have already made changes to NA-TERA that are not in KTERA in order to appease us here in NA. I understand that you see "fact" as what KTERA is right now but this will be a different itteration of the game to a degree of EME's choosing.
Yes you are right. And all in all i hope they will make changes about the channels.
But the fishy way they said they were "removing channels in area that aren't overcrowded" make me think they are just trying to fool players and let everything as it is.
And i kind of understand them. The game as it was designed in Korea needs the channels and i doubt that EME has the power to change it. It's too big of a change for them.
I see now why most of the people knowledgable about TERA have gone to the official forums and have given up here. It's funny to participate in for a while but-
Meh
Edit: Bad timing Otacu, it wasn't directed at you just in general. I feel like I'm having to repeat things over and over when the info is not hard to find. No worries though, I'll spend more time developing my characters story and post some in the guild section
Anybody have any information on Instancing in this game? I was reading some info in the ArcheAge forum and someone mentioned all of Tera being instances in order to handle the graphics and all all that sort of stuff..
If the whole world is set up into instaces then there will be less player interaction
..side note anyone interested in "sandbox" MMO should check out ArcheAge...graphically its on the same level as Tera!
i think you probably got enough answers by now, but its important to make a distinction between public (open) and private instances.
from everything i know, the vast majority of the overland/terrain is open world.
so its not a lifeless world where you never run into anybody. you see other players all the time in the overworld.
To add to that Corpusc the gameworld is open from one end to another barring dungeons. The "channels" can phase as you move to another area by there are no zone lines, it's one world.
The point that people argue is that if we're in the same place in the world map but I am in another channel then that is instancing. TERA tries to help this by always defaulting you to the most populated channel not full (this was channel 1 in all my play time).
Anybody have any information on Instancing in this game? I was reading some info in the ArcheAge forum and someone mentioned all of Tera being instances in order to handle the graphics and all all that sort of stuff..
If the whole world is set up into instaces then there will be less player interaction
..side note anyone interested in "sandbox" MMO should check out ArcheAge...graphically its on the same level as Tera!
This is a good thing every game should do this so we don't need to find out that friends rolled on any other server and in the event of a server having a to small population we don't need any server merging.
Me for instance (like many others I assume) are a member of a few gaming communities and I always have had to decide which community/friends I have to play with. And in some cases they quit the game... and I either have to find a new, unknown, guild or reroll on another server. With things like this, doing instances instead of a billion launch servers is better imo.
Now I do not know how many servers TERA will have but as I tried to say, instancing like this is not really a bad thing.
But as said, when I discover that a rl friend also have started to play we are on the same server. That is good aswell.
This is a good thing every game should do this so we don't need to find out that friends rolled on any other server and in the event of a server having a to small population we don't need any server merging.
Just give the option to change the server where you play.
(btw channel don't help much on the server merging matter ... at least it didn't help KTera from going from 37 servers down to 15 and japan Tera from 10 to 3)
This is a good thing every game should do this so we don't need to find out that friends rolled on any other server and in the event of a server having a to small population we don't need any server merging.
Just give the option to change the server where you play.
(btw channel don't help much on the server merging matter ... at least it didn't help KTera from going from 37 servers down to 15 and japan Tera from 10 to 3)
I gave a reason to why I thougth it to be a good thing, you just sent me a bad meme. That is just stupidity.
The text you put into paranthesis is moot, if you had bothered to read the test you qouted you would have seen that yourself.
As I said, and what you also quoted, those things can be avoided if you use channels. If they had nit used channels how many servers would then have needed a merger. Supposedly 37 servers with channels would have been alot more servers without channels needing a merger... how many servers would there have been if they had not had any channels if they used 37 servers with channels?
If they would just rename the channels, make them static, and you could switch channels errrm servers as you wanted. But they was presented to you as servers in the server list, and you could choose to just pick a server to play on. What would then be the difference with using channels if they would use them to just use one server and divide that server into channels when you login, especially when you can switch channel later?
"This is a good thing every game should do this so we don't need to find out that friends rolled on any other server and in the event of a server having a to small population we don't need any server merging."
-------
Example 1.
[PLAYER]
Can chose from/ and you wish to be able to switch server
[SERVER 1]
[SERVER 2]
[SERVER 3]
[SERVER 4]
[SERVER 5]
[SERVER 6]
[SERVER 7]
[SERVER 8]
[SERVER 9]
[SERVER 10]
Example 2.
[PLAYER]
[SERVER 1]
Can later change channel/instance
[INSTANCE 1]
[INSTANCE 2]
[INSTANCE 3]
[INSTANCE 4]
[INSTANCE 5]
[INSTANCE 6]
[INSTANCE 7]
[INSTANCE 8]
[INSTANCE 9]
[INSTANCE 10]
Those two examples is essentiall the same thing as long as it is possible to switch servers on example 1.
But as server transfers, or switching, are not that freely done in MMO's there are those good things in example 2 as I mentioned earlier.
Comments
From what I have read, yes. There are non-instance dungeons that claim to support more than one adventuring group in them. So I am assuming it will be like EQ, with certain groups in certain areas of the dungeon. As for the channels, I think it's the nicest way of handling the masses in the beginning. So long as they are used as overflow channels and only open up when the population reaches a certain number and closes in much the same way then I have no issue with them at all.
Poor immersion, it has the shortest lifetime in the animal kingdom; everything kills it. Or was it the most exaggeration?
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Well, play it and make a decisioin. Certainly feels open world to me.
Until the people who are trying the game,and realize it's not for them leave thus creating more room, there will be certain areas that are just crowded. The opted for a certain aesthetic and I think because of that aesthetic things could possibly turn into a slide show.
The only real case where I can see this stuff being a problem is on the pvp servers.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Except if EME said they take out channels if needed and we all know they have the ability to do that....
The game pretty much defaults you to channel 1, except in cases of severe crowding. If you want another channel, in the event of too much competition for monsters, there's usually a second one available. But you're going into that channel under your own power. Things generally have to get fairly crowded before they start auto-redirecting to other channels.
The game itself, save for the instanced dungeons and the two halves of the world on each side of the ocean, is seamless. You can travel between everything and everywhere on foot without seeing a single loading screen. You can see other zones if you look off into the distance from a good vantage point. When you're using the flying horse travel method, you can look down and see the actual mobs and players walking/fighting below you. In this area, the game has nothing to apologize for.
And yes, there are open-world dungeons. We've seen two so far in the betas, one weighted around lvl30, the other around lvl33 or so. They're full of BAM's, bosses, world bosses, and you'll never see a loading screen as you head into them from the open world.
A Modest Proposal for MMORPGs:
That the means of progression would not be mutually exclusive from the means of enjoyment.
This. I would rather them use channels the first couple months and have a correct amount of servers than to merge them later on because they spread servers out to handle the influx of players at launch. They already said they would consider removing them if it makes sense.
Also, there is a huge difference between instancing and channels. Instances make you zone, channels you choose to. TERA is not like EQ2 and Aion in that regard. If you don't think channels make a world "seemless" just don't change channels. Even if you change a channel in one area once you pass into another you get automatically switched to channel 1.
This is a smaller matter but can anyone say there are channels in "every" zone other than cities or is it just the earlier zones?
Just not worth my time anymore.
Promises. I trust only facts.
And right now in Korea the channels are everywhere.
I don't see why KTERA will use instanced channels and EME Tera won't. The only good reasons would be that the population issue won't be as big here in the west but this means the game population isn't doing well so it's not something i'm hoping for.
It's not a smaller matter imho.
And yes the channels are everywhere in KTera from earlier zones to the endgame areas, just not in the cities. It depends on the population distribution in those areas.
There will be no instances when the game becomes about territorial control. This is a LAUNCH FEATURE. Period. By the time most people are at endgame, they won't need the channels anymore.
Except it will end up having channels still albeit probably just a couple but they will definately have 1 channel for the territorial areas. Like Aion where there is different amounts of channels in different areas, the main city for each faction only having 1 channel, and the starting areas having like 6. Even before it went F2P it still had a couple channels in certain areas. But if they do have territorial control they will just have those areas set to 1 channel.
Wait .... wha-
Jeez Tera fanboys don't even know their own game? Channels are not a launch feature.
That "launch feature" is right now even in KTera and is instancing the overpopulated end game areas.
Jesus i can't believe people are just outright lying to make their game look good.
"TERA is fundamentally an open-world game, though it does have some instanced dungeons because players enjoy them. In the crowded open areas, we’ll split players into separate “channels” of the world during launch so that the game world won’t be too crowded—we’ve got to give the monsters a reasonable chance of surviving, right? But don't worry—you’ll be able to freely switch between the channels so you can stick together with your friends! After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren’t overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
http://www.tera-online.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11027
From their website, man. But yeah, I'm lying. This is a feature that a lot of MMOs use at launch. TOR did the same thing. LOTRO does it from time to time when new expansions come out. After the population spreads out, the channels, sharding, layering, or whatever you want to call them get removed. This is S.O.P. for a lot of MMOs these days at launch.
And stop comparing the NA version to the KTERA version. What works there, and what is necessary to do there, is not what is necessary here.
I was going to keep an eye on the game until I saw this. I really dislike game instancing like SWTOR has. I'd much rather be in a crowded area than having one instance only hold 100 people or so then another open up. Makes the world feel so dead, and you hardly run across anyone. I don't mind instances for dungeons but when I'm out in the open world or in cities, one thing that will kill my fun is instancing people, dividing them up. I suppose I'll give this one a pass for that reason alone.
Maybe check it out in 6 months to a year from release when there's less chance of instancing people up.
What happens when you log off your characters????.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
Dark Age of Camelot
Well, TOR had those instances up at launch due to the fact that their game engine sucked, and it doesn't seem to be able to hold as many people without issues. They no longer have the sharding anymore, at least on most servers. I'm HOPING that TERA's servers are a bit more stable based on the engine they are using. They seemed that way in the beta I was in, but we'll see.
Either way, they would like to do away with the channels if they aren't needed. That's the point. Hopefully, they won't be needed as the population spreads out. We'll see what happens. I agree that it won't matter much for PvE, but for PvP it would be kind of lame.
After launch, we’ll remove channels in areas that aren't overcrowded so that everyone can play together again."
See? they are not removing them. The channels will be there just like in KTera.
Jeez i have to even tell the obvious...
But since you don't trust facts (KTera endgame zones instanced in channels right now) and instead trust "promises"(heck it's not even promises... they are just fooling you and telling that the channels will be there even after launch as they are supposed to work) from the publisher.
How naive.
No. Did you ever consider that Ktera is out since january 2011?
On a healthy population server there will be channels even at the endgame areas.
If you don't see channels it means the server population is so low that the game doesn't need to instance the area. But that means the game is not doing well.
Which is what every single MMO that uses sharding says. If it's not overcrowded...they get rid of them. Doesn't that go without saying? Isn't that the point I was trying to make? It's not a feature that they expect to or want to use for the duration.
And again...KTERA is going to have a lot more use for that kind of thing than the NA version will. As proof, we can compare sub numbers once the game is launched in NA as proof of why they would. Isn't it the 3rd or 4th ranked mmo in South Korea? Have to believe it's got a larger population there than it will here. That won't necessarily be an indication that the server population is exceedingly low, either, since we really don't know how much their servers can hold.
So again...comparing KTERA to TERA in pretty much any capacity is pointless.
@Otacu
You do know that EME can make changes like removing channels right? They have already made changes to NA-TERA that are not in KTERA in order to appease us here in NA. I understand that you see "fact" as what KTERA is right now but this will be a different itteration of the game to a degree of EME's choosing.
Just not worth my time anymore.
No you said that channels was a "launch feature" and when you get to endgame you won't see it. And that EME will remove them after launch.
BIG LIE
The channels will be there forever and in every overcrowded area of the game except the cities.
When the overcrowded are won't be the starter areas .... the engine will just do its job and create new instances of the endgame areas.
This is how it will work.
Yes it's overall population is 4th in Korea right now but we are not discussing about overall game population here. What matters is the population of the single server.
If you we don't see channels in the high level areas like in KTera you can start to be worried about the health of your server.
Yes you are right. And all in all i hope they will make changes about the channels.
But the fishy way they said they were "removing channels in area that aren't overcrowded" make me think they are just trying to fool players and let everything as it is.
And i kind of understand them. The game as it was designed in Korea needs the channels and i doubt that EME has the power to change it. It's too big of a change for them.
I see now why most of the people knowledgable about TERA have gone to the official forums and have given up here. It's funny to participate in for a while but-
Meh
Edit: Bad timing Otacu, it wasn't directed at you just in general. I feel like I'm having to repeat things over and over when the info is not hard to find. No worries though, I'll spend more time developing my characters story and post some in the guild section
Just not worth my time anymore.
i think you probably got enough answers by now, but its important to make a distinction between public (open) and private instances.
from everything i know, the vast majority of the overland/terrain is open world.
so its not a lifeless world where you never run into anybody. you see other players all the time in the overworld.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
The point that people argue is that if we're in the same place in the world map but I am in another channel then that is instancing. TERA tries to help this by always defaulting you to the most populated channel not full (this was channel 1 in all my play time).
Just not worth my time anymore.
This is a good thing every game should do this so we don't need to find out that friends rolled on any other server and in the event of a server having a to small population we don't need any server merging.
Me for instance (like many others I assume) are a member of a few gaming communities and I always have had to decide which community/friends I have to play with. And in some cases they quit the game... and I either have to find a new, unknown, guild or reroll on another server. With things like this, doing instances instead of a billion launch servers is better imo.
Now I do not know how many servers TERA will have but as I tried to say, instancing like this is not really a bad thing.
But as said, when I discover that a rl friend also have started to play we are on the same server. That is good aswell.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ
NO, please god NO.
Just give the option to change the server where you play.
(btw channel don't help much on the server merging matter ... at least it didn't help KTera from going from 37 servers down to 15 and japan Tera from 10 to 3)
I gave a reason to why I thougth it to be a good thing, you just sent me a bad meme. That is just stupidity.
The text you put into paranthesis is moot, if you had bothered to read the test you qouted you would have seen that yourself.
As I said, and what you also quoted, those things can be avoided if you use channels. If they had nit used channels how many servers would then have needed a merger. Supposedly 37 servers with channels would have been alot more servers without channels needing a merger... how many servers would there have been if they had not had any channels if they used 37 servers with channels?
If they would just rename the channels, make them static, and you could switch channels errrm servers as you wanted. But they was presented to you as servers in the server list, and you could choose to just pick a server to play on. What would then be the difference with using channels if they would use them to just use one server and divide that server into channels when you login, especially when you can switch channel later?
"This is a good thing every game should do this so we don't need to find out that friends rolled on any other server and in the event of a server having a to small population we don't need any server merging."
-------
Example 1.
[PLAYER]
Can chose from/ and you wish to be able to switch server
[SERVER 1]
[SERVER 2]
[SERVER 3]
[SERVER 4]
[SERVER 5]
[SERVER 6]
[SERVER 7]
[SERVER 8]
[SERVER 9]
[SERVER 10]
Example 2.
[PLAYER]
[SERVER 1]
Can later change channel/instance
[INSTANCE 1]
[INSTANCE 2]
[INSTANCE 3]
[INSTANCE 4]
[INSTANCE 5]
[INSTANCE 6]
[INSTANCE 7]
[INSTANCE 8]
[INSTANCE 9]
[INSTANCE 10]
Those two examples is essentiall the same thing as long as it is possible to switch servers on example 1.
But as server transfers, or switching, are not that freely done in MMO's there are those good things in example 2 as I mentioned earlier.
I'm so broke. I can't even pay attention.
"You have the right not to be killed"
exactly right.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------