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.

15681011

Comments

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

    I think he meant successful as in hiring more people, moving into bigger offices and growing/expanding the game.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    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.

    All games have exploits, and Darkfall had less hackers than most MMOs. There was about 3 weeks where there were a ton of rampant hackers, but they all got banned in a mass wave when security was upgraded. I remember someone posted a link to the hacker forum, the tears were delicious.

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

    You compare people liking non instanced games to political parties, when you are the ONLY person in this entire thread who has brought up sandbox vs themepark, and have lumped everyone who dislikes instances into the sandbox category, which is just wrong.

  • ThorbrandThorbrand West Palm Beach, FLPosts: 1,198Member
    He hit the nail on the head. Instancing is for cheap lazy developers who are just out of a fast buck.
  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by winter
    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.

    All information has been gathered by the players. AV doesn't have a PR team, and Tasos is not a PR person. He's a producer who occasionally makes news posts.

    It is literally impossible for Darkfall to have ever had 100k subs, because their two servers, if both were full to the breaking point, would have only been able to have 50k players. So, you made up the first number, which means your second number has no merit.

    We know AV is growing because of news reports that track what AV is doing. They've gone from 20 devs to 60 devs, moved into a bigger building, opened a second server, got boxed copies on shelves, and are launching a new version of the game. If they were a dying company none of this would be happening.

  • BuniontToesBuniontToes Wayout, DEPosts: 529Member
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    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.

    All games have exploits, and Darkfall had less hackers than most MMOs. There was about 3 weeks where there were a ton of rampant hackers, but they all got banned in a mass wave when security was upgraded. I remember someone posted a link to the hacker forum, the tears were delicious.

    Agreed. All games have hacks and exploits.  I was watching a video this morning of teleport hackers in GW2.

     

    However, DFO has had several re-emrgenec of hack programs.  The positive has been the most overwhleming response by Av to ban these players in mass and retroactively.  Something I have never seen from a game company.

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    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 :).

    We're applauding them for saying it like it is, instances are used as short cuts for developers, not to make better games for the players. Themeparks can be made without instances if they're properly designed. But most aren't. Because that takes actual dev skill/work.

  • RedempRedemp Hot Springs, ARPosts: 1,042Member
    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    We're applauding them for saying it like it is, instances are used as short cuts for developers, not to make better games for the players. Themeparks can be made without instances if they're properly designed. But most aren't. Because that takes actual dev skill/work.

     

     I thought the reasons for proper instance implementation was pretty much explained by Tasos? I'd wager that there are reasons for instances, technological limitations and certain ease of access cases. The mass instancing thats become a standard in many themeparks never plagued open world games like DF though. We should probably be praising them for what they do right in DF and soon DF:UW  ;  not for not doing, what they never were going, and design wise conflicted with the premise of their game.

    /shrug

  • BuniontToesBuniontToes Wayout, DEPosts: 529Member
    Originally posted by Redemp
    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    We're applauding them for saying it like it is, instances are used as short cuts for developers, not to make better games for the players. Themeparks can be made without instances if they're properly designed. But most aren't. Because that takes actual dev skill/work.

     

     I thought the reasons for proper instance implementation was pretty much explained by Tasos? I'd wager that there are reasons for instances, technological limitations and certain ease of access cases. The mass instancing thats become a standard in many themeparks never plagued open world games like DF though. We should probably be praising them for what they do right in DF and soon DF:UW  ;  not for not doing, what they never were going, and design wise conflicted with the premise of their game.

    /shrug

    There are  several reasons for instances:

    #1 theme park players can run thier instacne without interference from ohter players

    #2 To  eliminate lines of spawn camping players

    #3 to improve the performance of a scripted encounter so that a group of players will epxerience the same performance when doing the scripted encounter.  An "instance" doess this by limiting the number of players that can contribute to server laoding for the given instace.

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,865Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Badaboom

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

    Same as above - that does not imply NA servers, only NA publisher.

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

     


    Originally posted by Badaboom

    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. 


     

    Same as above - that does not imply NA servers, only NA publisher.

    What exactly do you think a NA launch is then, if not an NA server?

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

    We're applauding them for saying it like it is, instances are used as short cuts for developers, not to make better games for the players. Themeparks can be made without instances if they're properly designed. But most aren't. Because that takes actual dev skill/work.

     

     I thought the reasons for proper instance implementation was pretty much explained by Tasos? I'd wager that there are reasons for instances, technological limitations and certain ease of access cases. The mass instancing thats become a standard in many themeparks never plagued open world games like DF though. We should probably be praising them for what they do right in DF and soon DF:UW  ;  not for not doing, what they never were going, and design wise conflicted with the premise of their game.

    /shrug

    There are  several reasons for instances:

    #1 theme park players can run thier instacne without interference from ohter players

    #2 To  eliminate lines of spawn camping players

    #3 to improve the performance of a scripted encounter so that a group of players will epxerience the same performance when doing the scripted encounter.  An "instance" doess this by limiting the number of players that can contribute to server laoding for the given instace.

    And all these problems can be solved WITHOUT instancing.

  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    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.

    All games have exploits, and Darkfall had less hackers than most MMOs. There was about 3 weeks where there were a ton of rampant hackers, but they all got banned in a mass wave when security was upgraded. I remember someone posted a link to the hacker forum, the tears were delicious.

    Pardon me if I don't take your word for it, since I still have recent hacking in the back of my mind. Well, not actual hacking offcourse. Scripting.

    That said, I still stand by my point. All this is for nothing when the exploiting starts. But I'm optimistic, so I'lle wait and see.

    10
  • BizkitNLBizkitNL NetherlandsPosts: 2,280Member Common
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    Originally posted by BizkitNL
    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 :).

    We're applauding them for saying it like it is, instances are used as short cuts for developers, not to make better games for the players. Themeparks can be made without instances if they're properly designed. But most aren't. Because that takes actual dev skill/work.

    We've had this talk before :). We see things differently on the subject.

    But I do agree that in a game like Darkfall (Or DaoC), instancing has no place.

    10
  • asmkm22asmkm22 Anchorage, AKPosts: 1,788Member

    Instances weren't for game developers' benefit.  That's what shards were for.  Not sure what that guy is smoking.

    Instances were introduced purely as a way of letting players experience content without having to "wait in line" for other groups to finish.  At best, it meant literally forming a line and waiting your turn.  At worst, it meant you had to PvP just to be able to run through some content.

    You make me like charity

  • GdemamiGdemami Beau VallonPosts: 7,865Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by DavisFlight

    And all these problems can be solved WITHOUT instancing.


    Maybe the can, maybe they can't..in either way it does not imply there is a bad design or solution for said issues is bad.

  • KeushpuppyKeushpuppy Wenatchee, WAPosts: 118Member Uncommon
    best game ever made didnt have instances. AC :P
  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,945Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    Instances weren't for game developers' benefit.  That's what shards were for.  Not sure what that guy is smoking.

    Instances were introduced purely as a way of letting players experience content without having to "wait in line" for other groups to finish.  At best, it meant literally forming a line and waiting your turn.  At worst, it meant you had to PvP just to be able to run through some content.

    Ummm... no.

    Instances were invented because it is a hell of a lot easier, and thus cheaper, to program a given encounter, when it is cut off in its own little box not connected to anything.

    Compare that to games made in the old days were everything was open world/no instances and everything had to work together.

    Multiple shards/servers were the answer to the "waiting in line" deal.

    Instances came about simply because they are easier to program, and game programmers/designers have been getting very lazy over the years.

     

    As to this game, let's hope AV did a better job with the quality than with the original version of DF, which was a complete POS for at least the first year.

     

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Anchorage, AKPosts: 1,788Member
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    Instances weren't for game developers' benefit.  That's what shards were for.  Not sure what that guy is smoking.

    Instances were introduced purely as a way of letting players experience content without having to "wait in line" for other groups to finish.  At best, it meant literally forming a line and waiting your turn.  At worst, it meant you had to PvP just to be able to run through some content.

    Ummm... no.

    Instances were invented because it is a hell of a lot easier, and thus cheaper, to program a given encounter, when it is cut off in its own little box not connected to anything.

    Compare that to games made in the old days were everything was open world/no instances and everything had to work together.

    Multiple shards/servers were the answer to the "waiting in line" deal.

    Instances came about simply because they are easier to program, and game programmers/designers have been getting very lazy over the years.

     

    As to this game, let's hope AV did a better job with the quality than with the original version of DF, which was a complete POS for at least the first year.

     

    I must have missed the part where designing an open world and letting players fight it out over who gets to access what content is somehow harder on the dev's than designing an open world and then adding in the instantiation code that allows various players to access the same conent dynamically, and within their own unique "instance."

    Yes, that's obviously designed to make the dev's life easier...

    You make me like charity

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Anchorage, AKPosts: 1,788Member
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    Instances weren't for game developers' benefit.  That's what shards were for.  Not sure what that guy is smoking.

    Instances were introduced purely as a way of letting players experience content without having to "wait in line" for other groups to finish.  At best, it meant literally forming a line and waiting your turn.  At worst, it meant you had to PvP just to be able to run through some content.

    Ummm... no.

    Instances were invented because it is a hell of a lot easier, and thus cheaper, to program a given encounter, when it is cut off in its own little box not connected to anything.

    Compare that to games made in the old days were everything was open world/no instances and everything had to work together.

    Multiple shards/servers were the answer to the "waiting in line" deal.

    Instances came about simply because they are easier to program, and game programmers/designers have been getting very lazy over the years.

     

    As to this game, let's hope AV did a better job with the quality than with the original version of DF, which was a complete POS for at least the first year.

     

    Also, shards had nothing to do with fixing the "waiting in line" problem.  They are there because actual servers have limits to the number of concurrent connections, so having multple shards (which are just servers) allows more people to play the game.  It has nothing to do with allowing people to not have to sit off to the side of a big dragon fight waiting for the currect group to kill it and then camp that spot for the next spawn, which is what I meant by "waiting in line."

    You make me like charity

  • LizardEgyptLizardEgypt Yarmouth, NSPosts: 337Member

    People are still arguing this topic? Let's just agree that Instances were designed to solve a certain problem, overpopulated areas/the desire to have all users have an uninterupted experience with bosses or encounters. Now they are abused and embedded into already weak game design (The same re-structured crap over and over again).

    They aren't one or the other. They aren't bad design, they aren't good design. They are just being used as a crutch to design games because developers THINK it's okay. We've proven here that a precentage of us don't like instancing games, whether that is a testament to player interaction, or a desire to deviate from the style of games that use them isn't relevant, what's relevant is that Tasos has chosen to avoid it and gave his opinion as a designer. 

    He thinks they are a crutch to fall on that breaks player interaction in favor of easier development costs.

    Spoiler Alert: He knows a lot more about MMORPGs than any of you do.

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

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

    [mod edit]

     

    Again, from the same paragraph that Badaboom quoted :

    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.

     

    Also, and contrary to your claim (Post #160):

    "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..."

    You did not have to purchase the new client to play on NA if you already purchased EU client, you could transfer your account for free (however transfering your character was not possible until 2-3 months after NA-1 launched). I do recall that players would have to pay $15 for something related, but I can't recall exactly the details. 2 of my accounts were transferred for free when I switched from EU to NA.

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

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,945Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by asmkm22
    Originally posted by Burntvet
    Originally posted by asmkm22

    Instances weren't for game developers' benefit.  That's what shards were for.  Not sure what that guy is smoking.

    Instances were introduced purely as a way of letting players experience content without having to "wait in line" for other groups to finish.  At best, it meant literally forming a line and waiting your turn.  At worst, it meant you had to PvP just to be able to run through some content.

    Ummm... no.

    Instances were invented because it is a hell of a lot easier, and thus cheaper, to program a given encounter, when it is cut off in its own little box not connected to anything.

    Compare that to games made in the old days were everything was open world/no instances and everything had to work together.

    Multiple shards/servers were the answer to the "waiting in line" deal.

    Instances came about simply because they are easier to program, and game programmers/designers have been getting very lazy over the years.

     

    As to this game, let's hope AV did a better job with the quality than with the original version of DF, which was a complete POS for at least the first year.

     

    I must have missed the part where designing an open world and letting players fight it out over who gets to access what content is somehow harder on the dev's than designing an open world and then adding in the instantiation code that allows various players to access the same conent dynamically, and within their own unique "instance."

    Yes, that's obviously designed to make the dev's life easier...

    It is actually a lot easier to deal with the instantation code (because they can re-use those code strings for each and every instance) than try to weave everything together in an open world setting and have it all work. That's the point. They get everything in the box to work, and then they tack the box on. It is faster to do, and thus cheaper.

    But what it gets you is a game filled with a bunch of little boxes connected by corridors. (Sound like any of recent MMOs? Like all of them?)

     

    I will not even say that all instancing has always been a bad thing, but developers have go so far down the road in over instancing everything, that that fact alone can outwiegh and overwhelm whatever good game systems actually might be there.

     

  • asmkm22asmkm22 Anchorage, AKPosts: 1,788Member
    Originally posted by Burntvet
     

    It is actually a lot easier to deal with the instantation code (because they can re-use those code strings for each and every instance) than try to weave everything together in an open world setting and have it all work. That's the point. They get everything in the box to work, and then they tack the box on. It is faster to do, and thus cheaper.

    But what it gets you is a game filled with a bunch of little boxes connected by corridors. (Sound like any of recent MMOs? Like all of them?)

     

    I will not even say that all instancing has always been a bad thing, but developers have go so far down the road in over instancing everything, that that fact alone can outwiegh and overwhelm whatever good game systems actually might be there.

     

    It sounds like your confusing instances with seamless zones.  The whole corridor thing is just a strategy to allow a player to move between two zones without seeing a loading screen.  It's done with a connector zone, which has the art and textures of both source and destination zones loaded in memory, but where line of site between them is broken.

    A common example is when you have city entrances that have the main gate closed, and you end up walking a short path around it to get inside.  That short hallway is the connector zone.  While you're running through it, the game is loading your destination zone in memory.  Once you finally arive, it unloads the previous zone from memory.

    The technology behind that has nothing to do with instancing, and everything to do with not having a load screen.

    World of warcraft is an example of an "open world" game that used that tech pretty effectively.  Every zone and many buildings had the connector zones placed in generally non-obvious ways, such as the link from the Barrens to Stonetalon (in that case, they took advantage of the max view distance by designing the connector zone very long , rather than play the line of sight game).

    Of course, after they added fying to Azeroth, they had to go back and redesign a few things which is why some zones are slightly smaller than before.  And now, with more memory available than at launch, they don't have to rely so much on connector zones, and instead just load evertyhing in the surrounding area in memory.  The game doesn't have many large textures or geometry, so it can get away with it.  Other newer games like Rift or SWtOR can't pull that off.

    You make me like charity

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

    [mod edit]

    Except that the quoted article says "NA launch" not "NA publisher" NA Launch. What are they launching, if not a NA client?

Sign In or Register to comment.