Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Aventurine "gets it". I wish all MMO devs did.

15791011

Comments

  • sanshi44sanshi44 BrisbanePosts: 1,088Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jahgreen
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by xDayx
    Yep. Open world is one of the sandbox tenets. Themeparkers will  never understand the appeal though.

    Yea but if your only open world tenets consists of mainly PvP then the're missing a large chunk of what makes sandparks appeal to all MMO gamers.  Things like Crafting, Building, Housing, freedom of exploration and discovery in a PvE enviornment.  Open World PvP'ers will never understand the appeal though.

     

    Except Darkfall hae crafting, building, player housin and exploration. So I do not understand your point. You kinda shot yourself in the foot.

    Sure it is there but it is there in its most basic form. Crafting is basic, player housing is basic, City building is even basic and exploration is basic. The game was made only for PvP in mind nothing else, (although PvE AI may be an upgrade from WoW mob AI's)

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid hell, NJPosts: 6,772Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by zymurgeist
    So no high resolution textures then?

    why not? they dont hesitate to charge a subscription + box + expansion + additional services (cash shop) these days to "maintain and evolve" the game so.... our money has to go to development in general and we havent seen that happening lately. The technology is there already, and keeps evolving on a fast pace. I personally think its lame when there are excuses that an mmo cant have some features put together because maybe the servers cant handle the resource demands or something. If you (dev) cant evolve the genre then dont make just another clone and then charge full price on top of it.

     

    EDIT: note im not talking about DarkFall, that goes to any developer that sacrifices game features for lame reasons.

    image
  • samvenicesamvenice BarcelonaPosts: 96Member
    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    However, DAoC functioned perfectly without instances. I never waited in line for a mob spawn. Nobody ever stole my kills (which I always found to be a dumb objection anyway, because if someone were to go about stealing your kills, they could do it in the public zones just as easily)

    I did wait in line for a mob spawn. A lot. Both rare spawns and also xp groups in "special spot" where you had to get on a "list"

    Helped only by the fact that playing on US server, I had the EU timezone to my advantage.

    Examples: Cloudsong, Shades of Mist, GoV, Battler etc (and in some cases, not even drop guaranteed! so had to camp and get kill stolen some more!). (or dragon epic not being up - lol)

    It was common practice to rely on community that whoever was camping an encounter, had the "right" to get it. Still, there were some jackasses rush in and zerg the shit out of everything. So while the quoted statement is absolutely NOT true, on the other hand it's worth mentioning that the lack of instances pushed people to work together, to forge a sense of community, to "organize lists" and other forms of self-discipline which lead to a true MMO feeling.

    I did not like darkfall for other reasons and will never play it again, as some of its design choices are definititely not my cup of tea: however, kudos to bold devs having the balls to do something different and speak the truth.

  • Shoko_LiedShoko_Lied -, WAPosts: 2,080Member Uncommon
    I have no clue why. But I had a dream that a bunch of developers were criticizing Tasos and saying how he is naive.
  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,860Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    An NA server was always part of the plan

    Can you provide a quote how NA server was always part of the plan?

  • wireded21wireded21 NorfolkPosts: 118Member
    Originally posted by karmath
    Say what you will about AV, but no one can fault them for actualy trying to do something different and stick to their guns.

    This.

     

    I play SWTOR and I like it, don't love it, but I like it. Somethimes I just think, all that money and that is what they did with it. Yet smaller operations like AV are really trying to do something different. Credit for that at the least.

  • MadnessRealmMadnessRealm Montreal, QCPosts: 2,716Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    An NA server was always part of the plan


     

    Can you provide a quote how NA server was always part of the plan?

     

    I do recall it being part of the plan as well, something AV had promised very early on but took quite a  while to achieve.

    Edit: Found it.

    http://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?t=191365 (27th May 2009) as well as from their old website's FAQ (first paragraph) http://www.darkfallonline.com/faq/general.html

    Roaming the threads from early 2009 reminds me a lot about Launch and the issues we had buying the client and the queues when entering the game :P

    ------
    Your daily dose of common sense since 2009!

  • SouldrainerSouldrainer Elmer, NJPosts: 1,857Member
    So basically, only the group who gets there first can ever run a dungeon. What? People have camped the dungeon 24/7 for two years straight? Who cares! Getting zerged when you approach, and not being able to do any content at all, is AWESOME! Player interaction rulez!!!!!!! Umm, no. Don't get me wrong. Somewhere an MMO will come along that has an awesome balance between sandbox/themepark, and between player interaction/game content. Darkfall is not that MMO. Darkfall is a niche MMO for fans of the EQ1 style of game design, and as such, it will never push thr genre forward in any way.

    Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,860Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by MadnessRealmI do recall it being part of the plan as well, something AV had promised very early on but took quite a  while to achieve.Edit: Found it.http://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?t=191365 (27th May 2009) as well as from their old website's FAQ (first paragraph) http://www.darkfallonline.com/faq/general.htmlRoaming the threads from early 2009 reminds me a lot about Launch and the issues we had buying the client and the queues when entering the game :P

    Well, all this information is months after the EU launch, also that does not imply they had the idea for 2 separate servers from the start.

    As far I can remember, Aventurine philosophy was only a single server ever and opening NA server was just because of latency issues.


    Iirc, if you already owned EU version, you had to purchase NA version again if you wanted to play on NA servers. Overall it was a very lackluster thus somewhat I do not think it was a part of any "plan"...planning and foresight aren't Aventurine's forte...

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by Badaboom
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Badaboom
    In terms of crappy design decisions that I think have hurt the genre, instancing is right up there. Followed by global banking, world chat, instant travel and auction houses. 

    Rewarding mediocrity, destruction of community, destruction of roleplay ride the top of my list.  Most of the stuff you mentioned isn't even on the radar.

    I know it isn't and its sad. I feel that the points I mentioned are the root of the cause of the effects that you mentioned. 

    More like I view your list as rote repetition, the official Party Line of the Sandpark Party. :shrug:  It's clear that most people who "hate instancing" aren't even terribly clear on why they should hate it; they just know that they're supposed to.  The reactionary element doesn't help either.   "Open world 1999 RAWR!" 

    Instances are just bad, mmkay, the DF devs told me so!

    Since we're in the DF forum...well...obviously most of the reflex RAWRs come from folks who support DF's choices.  Is that surprising?  If you trot over to WoW's forums, most discussions of game design tend to agree with Blizzard.  (That may be the home of the Classic Themepark Party.)

    But if you toss ideology aside, it's just one possible game design, not possible to feel hatred for it.  The ideology just comes from fanboys--the same guys that float from game to game trying to make all new titles Just Like WoW...except they're wearing DF t-shirts (or UO or EVE t-shirts) over here.

    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.

  • BadaboomBadaboom Moose Jaw, SKPosts: 2,380Member
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Badaboom
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Badaboom
    In terms of crappy design decisions that I think have hurt the genre, instancing is right up there. Followed by global banking, world chat, instant travel and auction houses. 

    Rewarding mediocrity, destruction of community, destruction of roleplay ride the top of my list.  Most of the stuff you mentioned isn't even on the radar.

    I know it isn't and its sad. I feel that the points I mentioned are the root of the cause of the effects that you mentioned. 

    More like I view your list as rote repetition, the official Party Line of the Sandpark Party. :shrug:  It's clear that most people who "hate instancing" aren't even terribly clear on why they should hate it; they just know that they're supposed to.  The reactionary element doesn't help either.   "Open world 1999 RAWR!" 

    Instances are just bad, mmkay, the DF devs told me so!

    Since we're in the DF forum...well...obviously most of the reflex RAWRs come from folks who support DF's choices.  Is that surprising?  If you trot over to WoW's forums, most discussions of game design tend to agree with Blizzard.  (That may be the home of the Classic Themepark Party.)

    But if you toss ideology aside, it's just one possible game design, not possible to feel hatred for it.  The ideology just comes from fanboys--the same guys that float from game to game trying to make all new titles Just Like WoW...except they're wearing DF t-shirts (or UO or EVE t-shirts) over here.

    Why do you assume that the people don't know why they don't like instancing?  Obviously both have pros and cons.  I also don't feel hatred for one design over another.  I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set. 

     

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Badaboom
    Originally posted by Icewhite
    Originally posted by Badaboom
    In terms of crappy design decisions that I think have hurt the genre, instancing is right up there. Followed by global banking, world chat, instant travel and auction houses. 

    Rewarding mediocrity, destruction of community, destruction of roleplay ride the top of my list.  Most of the stuff you mentioned isn't even on the radar.

    I know it isn't and its sad. I feel that the points I mentioned are the root of the cause of the effects that you mentioned. 

    More like I view your list as rote repetition, the official Party Line of the Sandpark Party. :shrug:  It's clear that most people who "hate instancing" aren't even terribly clear on why they should hate it; they just know that they're supposed to.  The reactionary element doesn't help either.   "Open world 1999 RAWR!" 

    Instances are just bad, mmkay, the DF devs told me so!

    Since we're in the DF forum...well...obviously most of the reflex RAWRs come from folks who support DF's choices.  Is that surprising?  If you trot over to WoW's forums, most discussions of game design tend to agree with Blizzard.  (That may be the home of the Classic Themepark Party.)

    But if you toss ideology aside, it's just one possible game design, not possible to feel hatred for it.  The ideology just comes from fanboys--the same guys that float from game to game trying to make all new titles Just Like WoW...except they're wearing DF t-shirts (or UO or EVE t-shirts) over here.

    Why people dislike instancing has been listed many times in this very thread. But thank you for the snarky ad hominem attack, instead of saying anything of substance.

    And it's been pretty firmly established that the pros far outway the cons in MMO design. (In small scale COOP online RPGs like Diablo, that's different, but when making actual MMOs, instances are the antithesis of the genre)

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Souldrainer
    So basically, only the group who gets there first can ever run a dungeon. What?

    Not all dungeons are designed like WoW's linear hallways. You're trying to deconstruct the idea of public dungeons, but its very clear you've never been in one. Hell, I'm not even sure how familiar you are with MMOs if you're saying Darkfall is "Everquest style". Whereas most of the people debating the other way have done both public and instanced dungeons.

    Pretty much the only thing detractors have used were examples from EverQuest, which I agree, had issues without instancing. But those problems were fixed by subsequent MMOs as early as 1999.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by MadnessRealm

     

    I do recall it being part of the plan as well, something AV had promised very early on but took quite a  while to achieve.

    Edit: Found it.

    http://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?t=191365 (27th May 2009) as well as from their old website's FAQ (first paragraph) http://www.darkfallonline.com/faq/general.html

    Roaming the threads from early 2009 reminds me a lot about Launch and the issues we had buying the client and the queues when entering the game :P


     

    Well, all this information is months after the EU launch, also that does not imply they had the idea for 2 separate servers from the start.

    As far I can remember, Aventurine philosophy was only a single server ever and opening NA server was just because of latency issues.

    No, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by samvenice
    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    However, DAoC functioned perfectly without instances. I never waited in line for a mob spawn. Nobody ever stole my kills (which I always found to be a dumb objection anyway, because if someone were to go about stealing your kills, they could do it in the public zones just as easily)

    I did wait in line for a mob spawn. A lot. Both rare spawns and also xp groups in "special spot" where you had to get on a "list"

    Helped only by the fact that playing on US server, I had the EU timezone to my advantage.

    Examples: Cloudsong, Shades of Mist, GoV, Battler etc (and in some cases, not even drop guaranteed! so had to camp and get kill stolen some more!). (or dragon epic not being up - lol)the truth.

    That was during the Trials of Atlantis expansion, which is univerally regarded as the expansion that broke DAoC. I should have stated "Pre ToA DAoC never needed instancing" but that's annoying to type and just confuses most people.

     

  • OziiusOziius Baltimore, MDPosts: 1,388Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Flex1

    If used perfectly instances can aid a mmo more than hurt it.

     

    I think Guild Wars 2 does it the way I would say perfectly fits the nature of instances. If you want story elements in your mmo add them.

    What he's talking about is player interaction. Guild Wars 2 is possibly the best example of how not to do it. I played that game for two months and there was absolutely no reason to group besides instances. The fact that they throw you into a group, killed the need for anyone to actually interact. And they didn't. All an instance does.. is remove you from the game world. How does that help? For example; Vanguard had dungeons.. but they were not instanced. When you went into one, you had to watch for other groups that were in the dungeon who may possible want to punch you in the face.. cause THEY want the goodies. That is good stuff and player interaction. Having a piece of the world just for your group removes you from other player interaction. 

     

    I agree with Adventurine's point of view here. Of course my first MMO was Shadowbane. There were no instances and it was a completely player driven world. I had better times in that game then any game since. 

  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common

    All this talk-y-talk is fine and all......I mean, a guy has a dream and people respond.

    But with that said, I'd care more for things like.....oh I don't know....cheaters and exploiters? Those 2 will hurt this game a lot more than any instancing ever could.

     

    Sheesh, it's almost as if people have forgotten what Darkfall was like, heh.

    10
  • BadaboomBadaboom Moose Jaw, SKPosts: 2,380Member
    Originally posted by BizkitNL

    All this talk-y-talk is fine and all......I mean, a guy has a dream and people respond.

    But with that said, I'd care more for things like.....oh I don't know....cheaters and exploiters? Those 2 will hurt this game a lot more than any instancing ever could.

     

    Sheesh, it's almost as if people have forgotten what Darkfall was like, heh.

    I agree with you.  I was lucky as I never had an experience with a hacker in Darkfall but know that there were a fair number of them out there.

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by Badaboom

    Why do you assume that the people don't know why they don't like instancing?  Obviously both have pros and cons.  I also don't feel hatred for one design over another.  I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set. 

     

    Because I've been reading this ...stuff... for quite some time now.  It clearly much more firmly based on emotional attachments to specific games (or specific frequently hero-worshipped classic developers) than it is to detached logic.

    I get it.  It's just the way gamers are; we form our judgements of what makes "good" games from our earliest attachments...but they almost never change thereafter.

    Fortunately, my attachment was formed to a game that significantly predates MMOs...and several times more 'sandboxy' than the best 'sandbox' renditions ever seen in MMOspace.  I see the party platform for what it is--usually unnecessarily devisive and far too binary.

    Huh...just like every other topic on a message board, come to think of it.

    I just wish I had more game options to play, with my desired feature set.

    No worries.  'Sandbox' seems to be the marketing bullet point du jour, starting just very recently (EQNext announcement? That's the point I first noticed the marketing team's newest scrambles, anyway).  We'll get at least a solid half-dozen to evaluate, over the next year plus.

    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.

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,860Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    No, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

    For the 2nd time:

    Can you provide a quote supporting such claims?

  • BadaboomBadaboom Moose Jaw, SKPosts: 2,380Member
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    No, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

     

    For the 2nd time:

    Can you provide a quote supporting such claims?

    I remember reading that as well.  http://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?t=87239

    January 22nd 2009 Launch Date Announced for Darkfall Online.

    Athens, Greece – December 5th, 2008 - Audio Visual Enterprises SA and Aventurine SA in a joint statement today announced that their highly anticipated MMORPG title Darkfall Online will launch across Europe on January 22nd, 2009. North American players are also welcome to participate in the European launch of Darkfall which will precede a North American launch.

    More details to be announced as they become available.
     

  • LizardEgyptLizardEgypt Yarmouth, NSPosts: 337Member
    Originally posted by Gdemami

     


    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    No, AV stated several times before launch that they intended to open an NA server, but that it would take longer. They said "NA players can take part in EU launch, and when the NA servers launch they will be accomodated".

     

    For the 2nd time:

    Can you provide a quote supporting such claims?

    Law-school dropout strikes again!

    Currently playing - FF14ARR
    Previous games - SWG, World of Warcraft, ShadowBane, Warhammer, Age of Conan, Darkfall, Planetside Asheron's Call, Everquest, Everquest 2, Too many.

  • RedempRedemp Hot Springs, ARPosts: 1,042Member
     So the only thing that this read has shown is that most people who played DF agree, instancing shouldn't be in DF, and as such applaud AV for not putting instancing in it. I also applaud AV for not instancing DF , considering it would go against their core concept I'm not sure if it was even a consideration or they deserve praise for it though.
  • winterwinter El Paso, TXPosts: 2,276Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by Siveria

    Sadly they don't get that open world greif/gank fests won't survive in the mmo world of casuals.

    Considering they are one of the only successful and growing MMOs of the last 8 years, as is Eve, I'd say you're wrong.

    DAoC is still my favorite MMO, but this style is viable.

     Where do you get that Aventurine is successfull and growing? You mean the current 10k players in DF when the max was at one time 100k? Yeah that sure is some growth.

      if your believing everything a Game PR person like Tasos is telling you then your gonna be seriously disappointed. Tasos is not known for his honesty or his reliability when it comes to DF.

  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common
    Originally posted by Redemp
     So the only thing that this read has shown is that most people who played DF agree, instancing shouldn't be in DF, and as such applaud AV for not putting instancing in it. I also applaud AV for not instancing DF , considering it would go against their core concept I'm not sure if it was even a consideration or they deserve praise for it though.

    Yeah, it's sort of a no-no for sandbox games, I guess.

    It's almost like applauding them for making it a PC game :).

    10
Sign In or Register to comment.