Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
MMORPG.COM News: Editorial: Instancing
Dana
Member Posts: 2,415
Neil Thompson, a new writer here at MMORPG.com, debuts with a look at instancing as a trend in MMORPGs - specifically City of Heroes and Guild Wars.
;) After recently spending a fair amount of time playing both City of Heroes and Guild Wars I got to thinking about what it was that appealed to me so much about online games. The answer was simple, the people. The communities in these games are fantastic with other players always ready with some helpful advice (sometimes whether you want it or not) and usually willing to lend a hand if things are getting a little tough for you. I then started thinking back to when I first begun playing online games with Ultima Online starting my addiction almost ten years ago.
Now, these are three very different games in many ways as those of you who have played them will be able to testify but what I want to concentrate on is player interactivity, specifically with regards to instancing. Instancing for those of you who dont know is where a mission area is open only to you and whoever you decide to take along with you, usually with a set group size. |
You can read the full editorial here.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
Comments
I don't have as much experience as the editor...anyway, I've played one of the tests of Guild Wars (Heavy instancing) Wow (some instancing) and Eve (No instancing at all).
After playing Wow, Eve got a bit boring on the PVE front: Most complexes (think dungeons) were camped 24x7.
Sure, no instacing makes things feel more "real" with other people on the place. But also, makes the hardcore players/farmers take over the bests parts/rare-dropping-mobs-etc.
Some people like PvP, ganking and competition, that's fine. But there are a lot of people (I include myself) that's not interesting in competing with other guys to be able to have fun with PvE.
For some reason, old EQers seem to be the ones that enjoy the competition aspect of the game, or so I saw during my WoW playtime.
Having a massively / persistance universe is not only about playing/competing with other people, its also about the prestige you can get amongst your peers because you have the shining armor or you are the first to kill a particular mob.
I hate instances, period. It takes away for me the feeling of community, and with that you take the good with the bad. Sure there are camps, but I can compete with anyone and if you try and play cock of the walk with me, I will end up winning over half of the time. Things like that, while at times frustrating, make these games what they were designed to be: Massively multiplayer.
Instances actually piss me off, as well as the people that want them. How lame is it to want your own copy of the dungeon because you don't wanna have to compete for certain spawns? You need to learn how to compete or go play another game. But nooooo, they make you an instance so you can take your sweet little time and hand pick a group and have your own private little Idaho, where there is a boss creature for you to kill and no one to compete with. /puke
I'm sick of instancing and I can't wait for Vanguard, a game that will not have any of these "Nerf Dungeons". A place where true community and competition can thrive.
EDIT: spelling
Lots of the people running dungeons are after a PvE experience, not after PvP. Competition for a dungeon doesn't fit that description (PvE). Personally, I'm more of the carebear type, as much of the paying public is (remember, the hardcore is like 5% of the potential player base). Personally, if I feel like logging into the game, get a party set with some folks, and run a nice dungeon, I'm not interested in fighting with a bunch of campers or farmers to get to the content. Why should I? If you like PvP, competition and stuff, what are you doing in a PvE dungeon zone?
. You can do the same, but still, I'm don't want to suffer from you ruining my fun.
I'll play the game as I want to, thanks you
I really dont understand the people that gets off in taking the fun away from other people.
Anarchyart, let me guess. You are:
1. Ex eq-player
2. Ultra-hardcore
3. In a über guild
4. PvP inclined
5. All of the above.
Thing is, I'm not gonna be the one to ruin your fun. I will let you have your turn, I'm one of the nice ones. Although I consider myself nice, I don't wanna play a game that eliminates competition because that is half of the fun! Owning some jerk who thinks he is king of the castle and making HIM skulk off and find greener pastures. I love that stuff.
Yes I used to play EQ, no I'm not ultra hardcore although I supremely enjoy a SERIOUS challenge, no I'm not in a uber guild and while I enjoy PvP, I don't consider myself PvP inclined; although I won't back down from a fight. I find PvP usually to be unfair, as someone will always know some trick or have other knowledge to make it unfair. I don't enjoy an unfair fight, but a fair fight is what it's all about and can be extremely fun and satisfying even if you lose.
Im not a fan of instancing in MMOs either, I feel it is somewhat against the original concepts of MMOs. By adding in instancing you are turning an MMO into a co-op online game, like Diablo 2.
MMOs are all about confrontation and the human ability to resolve such issues. With the addition of instancing a lot of this has disappeared, making the games feel numb and emotionless. There is no need for guilds to maintain decent relationships with each other to avoid raids clashing. The ability to pull in a little bit of extra help when you need to kill a mob isnt available if you are already at the instance's limit. Yes, instancing can prevent people from zerging boss mobs, but what is wrong with allowing that and instead being a little more creative with the AI so that zerging becomes a hinderance rather than a benefit?
I actually think the reason instancing has become popular with MMO producers is that it reduces their overheads, I dont think it is at all about improving the players experience. By adding in instancing they have reduced the demand for content, as now you can have many groups running the same content where as without instancing you would need to provide significantly more content to keep the same number of people occupied. They also reduce their support costs as their are less player disputes that require mediation by CSRs.
Now - I have only been around the MMORPG game for a few years - but I for one am one of those people who says "Oh that monster can't be soloed by a max level character - let me try anyway." This is something that would usually get me in trouble if I was grouped with other players - but a lot of the time, it all works out in the end.
Instancing - for MMORPG's is the best thing since sliced bread. I know - I know - there are those who prefer to have everything open, anyone can come and go as they please, but instancing is more like the old D&D modules for your group
. Plus most of the instancing I have come across - DAoC, WoW, CoH - and a slew of others, takes into consideration some other factors.
Take for example CoH and DAoC - the basic instance in CoH is based on your level; and the amount of people in your group. So - technically you can solo almost any instance in CoH. (I like to solo a lot - I am a casual player non hardcore - so it is easier for me to level when I solo.) Then you have the basic instancing of DAoC - where you can take your character from 1 to 50 basically through the instanced quest dungeons - which most of the time can be solo'ed.
The nice thing about WoW instancing is that it is your groups instance - so you do not have the possibility of fighting through a horrendous dungeon; wiping out just before the bad guy only to have another group sneak in and reap the rewards.
There are still the epic dungeons and quests, You have Hami raids in CoH, Dragon Raids and Epic Dungeons in DAoC - you know Caer Sidi is the best - the last guy in that one Apoc was killed the first time only about a year ago; with I believe over 100 people.
So Instancing - full approval - it makes gaming easier for the casual player especially when the coding is set so the instance will measure a level as opposed to forcing people to group all the time.
Oh where to begin:
DAoC Juansanchez 50 Armsman Igraine - Back from the Grave
DAoC Prol 50 Necro Igraine - Back from the Grave
CoH Devient 28 Mace/Stone Tank *Retired*
WoW Talgar 27 Warrior *Retired*
Horizons Goledstadt 35 Dragon *Retired*
And many many others in many many games. But I always go back to my home in DAoC
I have to agree that over instancing ruins community. I think WoW also has a good balance. I think DnD on-line is going to be over instanced and be too much like neverwinter nights and not a true MMO. If you want to run dungeons with a set group DnD online should look beautiful. If you want a community it will suck.
I think SWG had an awesome community. The player run content like groovefests, battle of the bands and other things was awesome. That is one of the big things missing in WoW. There isn't really a strong community. Other than groups for 40 man raids there aren't any needs for large socialization.
What I haven't seen mentioned yet is Anarchy Online. The first game that I know to actually use instancing, and definitely the only one i've played that's really done it right.
I think that Anarchy Online, at least for a time, had a good balance between instanced areas and outdoors areas. (This is really before Shadowlands came out). People spent a lot of their leveling time in 45 minute - 1.5 hour 'missions' (instances). All the other time was spent outside.
Anyway, didn't really have anything much to add other than that I don't really think it's fair to talk about instancing without talking about Anarchy Online.
To use WoW as an example:
Stratholme is an instance. The boss mob the Baron drops BLUE set gear for various classes. People form groups to go to strat, work their way thru the mobs until they reach the baron, kill him for the drop.
However if Strat was an open dungeon, free for all, the baron would be perma camped by a group of hardcore players/guilds. On a PvE server how would you "compete" for the baron? You can't kill the players that are camping it. If you try to KS or ninja loot they'll mark you, name you to the server or harrass and hound you all over the place.
Everquest had no instancing before LDON.
You had lvl 60s mass AoEing whole areas for cash, whilst you just wanted XP. Where is the community in that? You had groups of people sitting in the corner of a zone, for hours, fighting the same 6 mobs, often fighting over spawns that strayed close to their area. What community? You had bosses on long spawn timers, to prevent perma camping by a select few hardcore players/farmers. Community? You had the immature training to the zone wiping your whole group out handing you a nice long corpse run, or long wait whilst the cleric does the corpse run then resses. Great community.
I don't recall, ever, groups of players meeting up and heading into a dungeon and working their way to the boss mob at the end. Sure guilds sometimes did it. But usual pickup groups would get started then head for a "camp" spot and remain there to grind for the next few hours, often in silence, with only the puller speaking. And you call that community?
Brad McQuaid, now making Vanguard, said that instancing was a bad solution to a bad set of problems. He is right ofcourse. But he remains tight lipped about his solution.
To all of the above, I ask, what would YOU do to stop them? If stratholme was free for all, how would YOU prevent all the above occurring?
Having been around since the days of NWN on the AOL service (not the new Neverwinter, but the one based on the old SSI Gold Box games) I have alot of, sometimes I think far too much, experience with mmo's.
With that being said I think some instancing is a phenomenal idea. Sometimes my friends and I want to go to point B and not deal with other people. This would not even be an issue if the average combined intellect of many people online at any given time were greater than my shoe size. Little leet kiddies and their e-peens are not a benefit to the gaming community but a huge detractor.
I am a roleplayer and as a subscriber I have every right that the punk asses have to enjoy may gaming experience. But, there is a huge difference between the two sides. One is there to enjoy the game make new friends, create new stories and adventure. The other is there only to seek enjoyment at the expense of other players.
Now, instancing allows for another game mechanic that can not be handled in wide open game worlds. The feeling that your character actually has an impact on the game world. You destroy a bridge or kill a specific mob in your instance it doesnt respawn 5 minutes later. This more than anything else helps build immersiveness in the game world. Far more than the 10 year olds and their bastardized leet speak that went out of fashion before they were the hole in their daddy's condom.
In a wide open game world the campers farmers and grievers have sole ownership of spot a or monster b. Their mommy's pay their subscription fees and as such do not realize that everyone in the game has a right to that spot or monster the same as them. And when that spot or monster is for a quest the problem is magnified. No one should be forced to sit and wait for a group of punk kids to get bored, they havent for the past month, why should you think they will in the coming month?
In my many years of gaming more people are of a me first mentality than not. Back in the days of UO yes there were people that actually helped. But the community of those gamers has diminished with the influx of internet trash that dominate every single game anymore. It is now a far more common occurance to be ganked, trained, or kill stolen from than to see some stranger actually help another.
If it helps people enjoy the game more then I think instancing is a good thing. There are better ways yes, enforcement of server rules, enforcement of terms of service. A clamp down against grievers farmers and campers would all be better things but devs are lazy and dont care as long as they keep getting their money.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/7300033012
I enjoy instancing when used sparingly and properly. You are right that it does effect the community. As does making a large amount of solo content. Tons of solo content, tons of instancing... ends up being 0 grouping.
It's a balacing act that I hope the DDO people wake up and see. Right now it's looking like GW with a montly cost.
http://www.greycouncil.org/
HEY I NEED A NEW GAME TO PLAY CAN U ALLL HELP ME FIND A GOOD NOT TO BAD GAME??? PLZ
MrTex
Mr.Tex
That was just rude and uncalled for... go to general discussion or somewhere more appropriate.
Now, back to the topic at hand. I see a lot of people copying exactly what the article said, which isnt really a bad thing, as it is exactly right. Instancing is a way to add more immersion, and allow for more scripted story lines in an MMO game, where story and character are lacking because of the huge restrictions put forth by the size of the game. As many have said, CoH and WoW have done a perfect job of balanced between Open/Instanced areas.
When a game goes to such an extreme, as Guild Wars did, there is total lack of community. In fact, I even stated this would happen many times on the boards before the game even came out
Even though Guild Wars took instancing too far, it still did something right. It taught us what not to do. Frankly, thats all the game industry is about. Someone always has to go out on a limb, and try something new. Thats the only way we can improve on the games we make, and I am glad that someone finally went out and didnt follow the norm for once. Playing it safe is way too over-rated, and im glad someone had the guts to try something new, and see how it worked.
Overall, a good balance of Community/Partied areas must be set for a game to be fully successful. Sure Guild Wars has popularity now, but the way its set up, it really wont last. For anyone who may be developing a game, try to think about such things while youre planning out the first stages, instead of being stuck later. Personally, I have all but taken instancing out of my game. The only time you are really instanced is when two realms are in a siege.
Anyways, great article. I think a lot of people had thought of this many times, but never knew how to phrase it that well. You just took our thoughts and wrote them into an article for us all
EDIT: By the way, you can tell people are getting sick of the lack of community on Guild Wars, as it has been steadily slipping on the top 10 list for XFire
First off , I am against Instancing.
Why? In WOW you have your small grain of instancing. And in my oppinion it works well letting you
enjoy a special dungeon alone with your group.
But than you grab Guildwars and you find that instancing just doesnt feel like playing MMORPG
1. You are forced to group with random people
1a Most of these people are powergaming , running like wild trough the area just to catch the final goal
not even trying to enjoy the ride.
2a Lot of them are completely antisocial and will even leave the group in middle of the mission
2. You can not go "Exploring" and perhaps just casualy come to meet somebody. Help him, or perhaps even kill him (or trade, or whatever) - That is what makes mmorpg what they are
Anyway i will not rant about it to much.
Just play Guild Wars and you will see
- Upcoming games that have taken anti instance approach - Dark and Light
- Upcoming games that heavily instance - DDO , hope it will work out..but i doubt it
"Before this battle is over all the world will know that few...stood against many." - King Leonidas
While I am very much in favor of instancing, it must be done without destroying the community. I think World of Warcraft has done it best so far, it matches what he said about City of Heroes. Still, Guild Wars COULD have worked, the reason it didn't is not instancing but the fact that you don't actually NEED other players. I played it all the way to lv. 20 with henchmen, never needed other players to accomplish any "co-operative" mission. Most of the time henchmen actually played better than other players. So the game teaches people to play solo, rather than to play in group. Then there is also the problem that servers are merged, so you don't have to worry about your reputation since there are so many people, and you progress so fast that any friends you make are rarely in the same stage where you are anyway. So many things went wrong with that game.
The upcoming Dungeons and Dragons Online is based on otherwise similar structure, but it basically requires grouping, and limits the number of players on one server very much, which might result in an extremely good community. Nothing builds friendships like crawling through a major dungeon instance for several hours with the same group of people, with no other way to do it than in a good group. I had up to 50 people in my friends list in WoW, all of whom I met through instance runs, and many I chatted with regularly. Can't say I made much friends outside instances though, it might have been better to make even non-instanced quests so hard that you would have needed 1-2 friends to do them. But oh well, I guess nothing is perfect. :-/
In summary, I think instancing is not what makes or breaks a community; it is simply a very good solution to a host of other problems in these games. What really matters is whether the players NEED each other or not.
There needs to be a balance of instanced and non-instanced areas. I think CoH, EQ2 and WoW did nicely on that.
Certain content, like raids, have to be instanced in order to avoid camping kill-stealing issues. In Anarchy Online it was often frustrating to have to wait for hours because another group was camping the named boss you needed.
Non-instanced dungeons can also become problematic if they're crowded with too many groups. Any mobs you need are already slain by another group and you have to wait, or certain groups claim territory within the dungeon and you're limited to just one part of it.
However, fully instanced content would destroy the "massive" feeling of MMORPGs. Socialisation is an important part of MMOG games and it's often in EQ2 or WoW that I meet someone already hunting in the area I got a quest for, so we get to team and hunt together.
Currently playing:
* City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant.
* City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
So funny you should write this article now....this is exactly what I have been discussing witha friend..instancing is nice, but games like GW lose their community feel because it's almost entirely instanced combat. I stopped playing GW after one month. I felt like I was playing just about any other single player RPG computer game but with fancier graphics.
Games like WoW, CoH and AH do instancing right. There is plenty of wide open spaces for a good feel of community, but when it comes time to so some serious dungeons, you don't have to worry about campers.
For players like me, I like hte MMO and the RPG, more than the two separate. GW..shelved after a month, WoW...played in beta, and I'm still going strong.
Its been a well discussed topic since GW was released i think, and touched on briefly before then every once in a while.
im supprised no one has made it here with the old "guild wars isn't an MMORPG, your all idiots!" which is commonly seen in this type of discussion, but there is a point there, the Arena net describe it as a CORPG, similar to the likes of diablo, the newer NWN and other such games. its just taken to the next level of design for that style, and rests close enough to MMORPGs that we see it here, it was never really ment to be played like a MMORPG, and for a lot of us that tried and soon left GW, we feel a little disheartened by it, and its a good eye opener to what instancing can do to MMORPGs that are designed and marketed as such if left unchecked.
As the writer of the article said, a little instancing used well can solve some problems without causing new ones, but there is a fine balance there, a balance that some would say the likes of EQ2 broke, and i guess i'd agree.
I consider instancing for the most part to be a ceap solution to the problems faced in EQ1 and UO with the likes of griefers, campers and the minority problems that you will get with any mass human interaction, having read some of Sigil's thoughts on the matter and how they will be solving the problems without instances i do feel satisfied that tehre are other ways, and that perhaps instances where a short lived for mass use, and will slowly fall back into their place as a design option, not a cheap fix.
One example of istances being used as a design tool is that the last i heard age of conan would be having all players progress through instanced play from 1-20 as they progress through their story arc's and develop their characters and progress in their class before entering the game. which im quite excited about, but at the same time quite worried that if done badly it will just cause problems, but it has great potential to give players some form of story and background feel that they'd get from a solo game, before being left free to make their way in the world of hiboria (that spelt right?)
It all comes down to balanced use.
It is a great tool for allowing SOME encounters to be simultaniously done by many groups. When used as a PART of a game as in EQ's LDoN (a cumulative system of acquiring points to buy gear greater than group drop value and less than raid value items, it is pretty effective. You still get plenty of interaction elsewhere. It's also great when used as in City of Heroes where the instances adjust difficulty to number and level of players. In both these games grouping is easy, EQ because of a good grouping tool and CoH because the game adjusts to the group so you don't need the "perfect" group. (Note that both of these are PvE games)
The problem is where it is overused, where the instances are the only high end game. Eventually you only interact with your guild (as in EQ with Plane of Time and WoW after level 60). Also consider that many games actually have to use it now since too many features and seamless worlds (no zones) have strained resouces to where instances are the only way to avoid lag.
Sadly it's become a crutch for lazy programming....keeping the max-level players busy with minimum content.
Instancing is a godsend for a game with limited content for people at the level cap...as in WoW...can you even imagine the camping of those VERY few boss mobs without instancing? Can you even envision the lag? ...and the weakness there is that there is no viable grouping system in WoW and nothing outside of instances for a level cap player to do. Thus little community interaction at the top level.
Balanced use is the key.
Anwar/Geezer
At the moment, I view PvE instancing as a necessary evil if the game is going to be loot centric. The WoW instances are needed as the best drops are from boss mobs, who would be camped all the time if they weren't instanced. In games where loot isn't the driving force, instancing really isn't needed, except for possibly balancing the content verse the group. The CoH door missions actually made sense to me as instances.
Let's talk about PvP instancing though. If it is going to be a guild verse guild arena battle, than an instance would make sense to prevent interference. I find WoW battlegrounds, however, to be the antithesis of what I am looking for in a MMORPG. I can understand the need to try to balance the number of players involved, but it shouldnt be at the expense of immersion into the game world. If you win or lose, just jump back and queue and start over again. It reduced what can be the most exciting part of the mmorpg experience into a pointless exercise in trying to get your name on the high scorer's list...
Good article Neil. I definitely agree, and have to say that the perspective Everquest 2 took is very fitting to tackle these issues. There are instanced areas but they are instanced according to how many players are in there, instead of instanced per each group or solo person. This cuts back dramatically on camping and competition, but not so much that it just isn't there at all.
World of Warcraft has a similar solution to the problem by giving more non-instanced content, some intanced content, and the ideal version of locked encounters where the first person to damage gets the rewards, but anyone can join in to help.
You could also have a game designed in the fashion of EVE-Online, albeit completely different from a fantasy rpg, it still lends to the idea that if you make the world huge enough, you will rarely have a problem. People can go off to a remote area if they want, or venture to the more populated areas. The problem in developing a fantasy rpg like this is of course the environment content. The game would easily be hundreds of gigabytes if you mixed the size of EVE-Online with the interactive content per area of other current MMORPGs.
I like this Mr Thompson!
Not only did he praise Instancing, he praise CoH! This is a man with great tastes!
Personnally the open zones for me in CoH where by no mean a troubles even if I hardly meet peoples or hunt much there, I understand others peoples have different gameplays and well...it dont hurt me in anyway while I run to my instanced. In fact, I often receive group offers and told them that I would NOT be doing outdoor hunting (exception for badges), it was instancing or nothing, which usually bring them to do some instancing with me.
I am an ex-EQer and I enjoy a FRIENDLY competition, since those games are COOPERATION before anything else, if they can be COOPERATION & COMPETITION on a second layer, all the better. As long as the competition is secondary to the cooperation, I am like a fish in the ocean! See, I like to try to do better then the other hunter and help the clan more, I dont like that if I do so he cant get any merit or upgrade, and instancing is just perfect...it allow friendly competition that is completely submissive to cooperation...Instancing is a blessing! I can deal pretty well with losing that competition and been behind, but I will never give up!
I will never refuse to group someone for competitives reasons. I refuse grouping peoples who steal my rightfull loot in a non-instanced zone, persons I would never have refused grouping if the game would have been instanced (and in some case the player suffer much from it, stealing a chanter, then said chanter refuse to group you and systematically leave any group you are in...not only are peoples considering why a nice person hate that person, but they are considering why a nice chanter who is a little edgy is refusing 1 person...you say help to KS my epic and you get pretty much sure that the person was in a trash bag for good...in an instanced mission, this cant even happen, nobody can KS you...which is good because you dont get KSed, but also because the KSer dont get a bad reputation)
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Personally i hate instance zone. True the can build emersion the first time you do them. After a while they get so boring, and repetitive. I would much rather have a zone where i can meet other adventures, and group up with, or help them out. There are some easy ways toget rid of campers, but even with campers in most of the mmorpg i have played i found i could just go else where to hunt if a target mob is camped, or if it is a drop i really want i wait my turn.
I have seen a few games that had actual random encounter. this would greatly decrease campers if the names spawned randomly anywhere in the zone your at. The only reason to set up a camp in these zones, was to pull the monster you are hunting to a safe location to avoid getting unwanted creatures.
Also with more instancing it is harder to find group for the open places. Nothing worse then having to wait for a group to open up just so you can go to a zone you wish to hunt in. then your with the group of people for a short time they run off after and you rarly hear from them again. with open zones i can go there look for a group help groups already there, meet players, alot of time it seems people end up liking sets of zones and spend most of there time there when the zones are open.
And to what a few said earlier, yes i play eq 1. No im not a power gamer, No i am not in a ubar guild.. well not at the moment. I have played many games, and none have gotten a decent pvp out yet, so i am a non pvp type. And i find more of the instance lovers are those that prefer to solo or be greedy with the monsters of an area. They are the annoying campers that can't stand when someone else is taking their mob.