It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by MMOExposed Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by Benedikt actually no - gw2 (and aoc) "instancing" is a protection against "empty zones" which do happen a lot in most of other mmorpgs when most of the players are already max level - have to say i was not bothered by it in gw2 at all (well mostly at all, i could have live w/o a time it took to transit from overflow to normal zone)
Also, instancing has been around for over a decade now.
I wonder what your opinion on Instancing is Loktofeit....
IMO, it's a tool like any other. Can be used poorly and can be used to really enhance game features or gameplay experience.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by NaughtyP For all the good instancing can do, it has done one thing to my MMO experience which I find unforgivable: breaking immersion. As soon as I'm in a copy of a world/dungeon, the experience deteriorates because of the lack of a persistant, singular world. I would have to guess this doesn't bother other people as much as it bothers me because I find it very disruptive to gameplay.
Obvious it does not bother people. In fact, this "immerision" is not important to me at all. It is not like i don't know i am playing a game. When i play other games (like SP or even online games), it is not like i don't know there are millions others doing the same.
Fun is much more important. Given the popularity of LoL, WoT, D3 (all instanced) ... i bet it is not a huge issues for most gamers.
BTW, i think it is the opoosite. Instanced is much LESS disruptive to gameplay. You go in there, and you are not disrupted by the need to travel, or talk to people .. and you can focus on adventure and combat.
For some of us it DOES bother. Immersion IS important to more than you believe.
And that god awful "talking to people" , well some of us actually like to socialize in a mmorpg.
Shocking isnt it ?
Originally posted by NaughtyPFor all the good instancing can do, it has done one thing to my MMO experience which I find unforgivable: breaking immersion. As soon as I'm in a copy of a world/dungeon, the experience deteriorates because of the lack of a persistant, singular world.I would have to guess this doesn't bother other people as much as it bothers me because I find it very disruptive to gameplay.
Yes, undoubtedly, instancing breaks immersion.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Originally posted by Dahkoht Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by NaughtyP For all the good instancing can do, it has done one thing to my MMO experience which I find unforgivable: breaking immersion. As soon as I'm in a copy of a world/dungeon, the experience deteriorates because of the lack of a persistant, singular world. I would have to guess this doesn't bother other people as much as it bothers me because I find it very disruptive to gameplay.
Immersion is different depending on who you talk to, though. For you, it seems immersion is greatly affected by the loading screens and the separation from others. There seems to be a lot of people that feel that way. For others, immersion is greatly affected by having to compete with 20 other newbs for the same 5 rats, or by reaching the evil villain's lair at the end of a dungeon to find stalwart adventurers standing in line for their turn to kill him.
In most cases, there are pros and cons to immersion on both sides of the instancing fence.
Originally posted by Loktofeit Originally posted by Dahkoht Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by NaughtyP For all the good instancing can do, it has done one thing to my MMO experience which I find unforgivable: breaking immersion. As soon as I'm in a copy of a world/dungeon, the experience deteriorates because of the lack of a persistant, singular world. I would have to guess this doesn't bother other people as much as it bothers me because I find it very disruptive to gameplay.
I completely agree , I was pointing out that there are plenty who prefer the open world cons vs the instancing cons.
Many assume that "their" way is the "correct" way simply due to most modern ones leaning towards in this case more and more instancing.
For me , I rather see groups in line over an open world boss mob or fighting amongst themselves in an open world dungeon , but still have open world everything , over a private instance where you and 300 other groups in their own at the same time just slayed Main Boss Dragon instance 287 version etc.
I'd just like a modern graphics wise mmo in the original EQ style , where there was actual haggling in the East commons tunnel for trading of goods , wizard and druid portal services , chatting on the boatride across the ocean between Freeport and Butcherblock etc.
You know , that awful "talking between people" in an mmo
An instance does serveral important things.
1.) Provides an environment clean from disruptions allowing a full game experience. This means allowing for players to 'run through' say a dungeon without everything being dead and farmed before the bosses just as a rough example
2.) Allows for challenge fixated aorund a certain number of players. Given others are tossed in, the challenge would be lost.
3.) Allows for 'events' that would be impossible in an MMO setting, allowing for more story to be drive in game much like a Singleplayer game would despite being in a MMO setting that can't do that.
4.) Permits more advanced effects/mechanics that given large numbers of players around, would likely lag most players systems and make it difficult to handle mechanics due to that lag.
Instances exist BECAUSE it is an MMo. Without it, despite what you all think, you can't alter time and space in an MMO so it can magically make things work as if it was a dungeon in the MMo world, not having all those factors in play. There are some methods that have come out allowing more to be done in open world, but for them to not be needed your going to have to learn to break the physics of our world to allow that to happen. Even games/programming can break the fundamental rules so much and even then one can consider those 'breaks' (lets say phasing as example) as more so glorified instances without a loading screen..
Another modern next gen™ instancing / phasing idea.
This game is brutal,in this game your level doesnt change if you go to lower/higher level areas,in this level of the area changes.
In this game you can go to wherever you want,right from the beginning and have fun (no more stupid grinding for n00bs)
You can go to megadragons lair(end game instance) and if you go there at lvl 1 then the megadragon is lvl 1 also.
In this game you can laugh to collect poisoned apples quests or to yourself,if you do those missions at lvl 1 then you only need to collect 1poisoned apple,if you do it at lvl 60 then you must gather 60.
real time instancing™
Heres the catchphrase "Dont let the world change you,you can change the world"
And some of us don't. Let's vote with our wallets.
Originally posted by yangdudeLike seriously, am I the only one that thinks the 'instanced' style of GW2 really sucks - I mean REALLY.
Probably not all alone but very insignificant minority.
Have a nice day!
Originally posted by Gdemami Originally posted by yangdude Like seriously, am I the only one that thinks the 'instanced' style of GW2 really sucks - I mean REALLY.
Instanced is obvious here to stay. Heck, there are games which ditch the world, and focus on instanced (particularly many pvp games, WoT, LoL, Mechwarrior online ...).
Non-instanced dungeons are like shopping malls. Lots of dead mobs and running players passing by. Traditionally these places should be like a den of a dragon or a thief's hideout, not something where you meet half the players on your server. However, if the game is designed so that not all players are heros or adventurers but some people play crafters, politicians, entertainers, etc., even open dungeons could work.
Open world, on the other hand, should be just that, open. Instancing and / or phasing kills immersion and doesn't belong to MMORPGs. Named boss mobs or similar stuff in open world should be designed well to prevent camping and farming.
I can understand that limited bandwidth combined to growing technical requirements makes instancing a tempting tool for game designers, but if they can't make an MMO without heavy instancing they should make some other type of game instead.
This is one of the reason WOW has been the most successful MMO ever, it was immersive and did not use instances in the world so what you see was what you got.
GW2 is a small village, WOW is an entire world, that is the difference and that is why Blizzard remain the number 1 MMO developer.
No I am not a wow fanboy, I quit after Burning crusade as it became utter crap.
Originally posted by deniter I can understand that limited bandwidth combined to growing technical requirements makes instancing a tempting tool for game designers, but if they can't make an MMO without heavy instancing they should make some other type of game instead.
Just call MMO a different name. Problem solved.
Names are just label. Totally unimportant to me when i choose a game. If a game with instances is fun .. hey .. i will play it whether you call it a ARPG, a MMO, a FPS, or whatever.
Originally posted by DamonVile I think it's a great feature in any mmo. While I do like to see people running around the world with me, the most imersion breaking aspect of any mmo is waiting in line to kill the big bad guy. How is he the bad guy when he's only alive for 5-10 seconds at a time ? what could he do in that time that makes him so bad ? In an instanced zone I can switch channels and fight him the way he should be...spanwed and walking around being the bad guy.
The most baffling mindset to me is waiting in line to kill an NPC. If I see others who appear to be after the same NPC I'm after, I invite them to group so we can all kill it together. Makes for a lot less standing in line and plays to immersion much better. This mindset is much of the reason for all solo open world quests, personal instances, and phasing. Anti social behavior seems to have established a large presence in MMO gaming, and is growing more abundant as time goes by.
Originally posted by Cochran1
What if 100 people show up, you invite all of them into your group? Your loot change dropped signifiantly. And how can you trust no one is going to ninja?
It is better to have personal loot/instances and what-not .. and not deal with all the drama and bickering.
Instancing is a really old development.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Nah you're not alone. Most non-WoW gamers feel the way you do.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by Cochran1
Those named NPCs are seldom about random loot. More often the quest is to kill it and get the NPCs head or similar drop that everyone in the group can loot. Sometimes just killing it is enough. Happened to me some time ago in WoW trial when i was in nelfs' starting zone and in the cave with a named spider i had to kill. There was a number of people standing by the numerous corpses of said spider, and after few spawns i suggested we should team up to avoid the tagging competition. No one answered so i started to invite people to group up for which they all refused.
IMO, it's just bad quest design to make people kill unique mobs that are soloable. Either give them a chance to skip the quest, or make it a group quest so there's always more than one player killing the boss mob.
In answer to a couple of comments here
nariusselden said that it obviously does not bother people and if it did people would vote with their wallets.
They have been. Many MMO players migrate from one MMO to "the next big thing" as soon as it releases.
Which comes back to NaughtyP's comment - it breaks immersion.
MMO worlds were supposed to draw the player in. To make the player feel part of something - to make them feel like part of a world and make them want to stay.
Heavily instanced games simply don't do that. Players don't feel attached to the world and so it's easy to simply move on to the next 'themepark' when it opens. For the developers - that's a disaster. To recover the development costs they need players to stay.
But what is happening is players are signing up, rushing through the main quest lines to finish the 'story' and then moving on. Exactly as they would for a single player game - since that's the experience they are getting. On the way, they largely ignore the 'world' around them, since it doesn't matter. They have no influence on it and as a result no attachment to it. It becomes a series of Boss Fights and Loot Drops progressively leading to the penultimate Boss Fight when they can say "I was there, I did that, I WIN!". Then it's over and they can move on. They don't need to worry that they missed anything on the way - because they didn't. It was all instanced and served on a platter.
Developers need to look closely at what they are trying to achieve. Worlds like The Chronicles of Spellborn and Vanguard, to an extent even LotRO mean that sometimes you have to hunt for the things you want. It's possible you might get to where that boss should be and they simply might not be there. Maybe you picked the wrong time of day? Maybe you need to read the story for clues as to where that creature might be? Maybe while you are exploring you will find something you didn't know was there?
Games that allow you to build and alter the game world mean you can leave your mark. You build a mine or a cottage or a fortress... or even plant a small garden... you have an investment and you want to come back to see how it goes.
From the design point of view, Designers that were forced to think about their world, how it worked, where players would be and could go, where mobs and bosses were and how it all worked together might have had a far harder job - but when they got it right the worlds really had something that made them seem 'alive'. And people of stayed around - just to see what happened next.
An excellent example here is EvE. I have never played it. But I know about Goonswarm and BoB and Titans and 0.0 sec space. Why? Because it's still going on. Who doesn't know about the ongoing dramas? Epic.
Star Trek Online? One day when I have a spare month I might play it. But only because it's free. Meh.
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Originally posted by Gyrus nariusselden said that it obviously does not bother people and if it did people would vote with their wallets. They have been. Many MMO players migrate from one MMO to "the next big thing" as soon as it releases.
Yes ... because they run out of content. Obviously they don't go from an instanced game to an non-instanced game. In fact, many moved from instanced with world games to instanced only game.
Originally posted by Aelious There are advantages to not having instances in an MMO setting that so far have been looked upon as a bad thing. You aren't the most important person. I know this is hard to take especially when we pay with our time and money but SP games are more designed for self. "you mean I have to WAIT for a mob to spawn!? I pay good money and demand to be entertained now!". One of many roadblocks removed and the pace is just to fast to care about others. I mean in the real world people act like they are the most important for a lot less lol. Maybe that's a small reason why I don't like instancing that seperates people, self importance irritates me.
Not many people choose to pay for mediocre entertainment. Games which allow their playerbase to grief one another are mediocre entertainment.
It's a cost in fun to have to wait for a mob respawn because of someone else. What does this cost pay for?
Since your post didn't mention the advantage being paid for it has the feel of, "You have to wait. Deal with it."
Well, players are dealing with it. By avoiding those types of games.
Anyone who thinks "talking to others" is a nuisance , is the exact kind of player I'd hope would be put off by an open world game without instancing.
Community is important to some , and a missed aspect that is severly lacking in the latest mmo's.
I suppose instancing is important under certain circumstances... say a game that is heavily gear-driven with few alternatives to acquiring the gear. Immersion probably isn't important if the devs and players are both keen on kill, loot, repeat. I have no problems with that. Instancing acts as a safeguard to allow everyone to complete content and get their loot.
But if I were to pick a game like ArcheAge, things like combat or loot are probably going to take a back seat for me. I can build things. I can explore a huge world in many different ways. Could I get griefed along the way? Sure. But I'll gladly take the risk of being griefed in a game where I am immersed and having fun over a game I simply do not find immersive.
To each their own.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.