It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Jean-Luc_PicardA scenario which happens quite often in completely open zone MMOs with "camping".You arrive with your guild at some boss spawn deep in a dungeon first. You guys setup camp, and start the wait.4 hours 50 minutes later, some other guild arrives. You start to discuss with them about "first come, first served", but the guys don't care, they say "who kills gets the loot".5 hours later, the boss spawns, the douchebag guild tags him first, does the most damage, and gets the rewards, while your complete guild just wasted 5 hours for nothing, not even a good fight.Anyone pretending it's fun can't be anything else than masochistic.Dungeons can be open, but the major bosses must be instanced.
I understand what you're saying and do agree to a point. This is why EQ required some amount of organization skill to play. The game was not "all about me", but rather how you (and everyone else) played together. Hot spots for camping were many times "scheduled." If another Guild ignored that schedule, you had something to fall back on when the GM appeared.
How many times did the above scenario happen? I am sure everyone has an anecdote or 2 for themselves and another 1 or 2 more from their friends.
And honestly, I have to ask, would you spend 5 hours in an MMO today sitting in one spot?
These awful, un-fun, terribad scenarios all assume that mobs are on a terribly long timer with a God-awful drop rate for special items. Do they have to be?
As an aside, this is where PvP would be perfect. Let the 2 Guilds duke it out.
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Sovrath Whether it be a pvp experience such as cresting a hill where a known boss was only to not only discover your enemy but "your enemy in force" or a pve experience such as accidentally aggroing too many mobs and having passersby get you out of a tough spot.
1) I have enjoyed that. In games like BF3 and World of Tanks, and DOTA2 or League. In games where the devs plan for that type of gamer and put rules and barriers to keep the less well-adjusted of the group from ruining everyone elses fun.
2) I remember that, too. I remember how that faded into memory as people learned they got nothing from helping you, and just got out of your doomed way, and clucked ruefully about 'better him than me'.
Just like the human race, the bigger the gaming world gets the more rules it needs to reign in the fringe.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
Originally posted by Phelcher
Instancing isn't good, or bad. That is determined when/how a developers uses it.
*If you are doing a quest w/friends and you open a chest (ZAP).. u get ported away from them (into an instance) where some quest, or story gets played out... = great use of instancing.
so if instead of porting you to an instance, it ported you to a locked off area of the shared world that had no one else, how would this be any worse (or better) ?
*If Developer's built their game so cheaply that they need to re-use already known dungeons and double... triple.. them up as an instance.. so their player base doesn't know how cheaply they made the game = bad use of instancing.
Right, so if instead of instancing, developers took an existing open-world dungeon, clicked "copy" and threw it out into the shared world, calling it "Dungeon Two", how would this be anything other than "cheaply making the game"? how would this be so much better than instancing? Instead of one door that leads 30 instances of the same Castle, you now have 30 identical castles side by side out in the open. It's still just as lazy. Only in addition to being lazy, now the world looks ugly.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STOFavourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, FirefallCurrently Playing: ESO
Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Are people fighting for OPEN WORLD because of PvP? What if it's not a PvP server? Would that change your immersion level? (does seeing other groups fighting wolves while you kill bears make it more immersive?)
Seeing other people doing anything in the game makes my game play more immersive. Fighting, dueling, crafting, singing, talking, dancing, vending, begging...... the list goes on and on.
Originally posted by arieste Originally posted by xAPOCx You want population control? Leave that up to the pop a sever can hold and let the chip fall where they may. removing instances, you'll never get a notice saying Qeynos is full. Qeynos should NEVER BE FULL!!!!
This implies using multiple server technology, which creates multiple copies of the same world and PERMANENTLY separates people from each other. I want neither multiple copies of the world which i can't travel to, nor to be permanently separated from others that play the game. I want everyone in the same world, even if it's not all at the same time.
I guess it's a matter of preference. You'd rather have 50 other copies of Norrath that you can never visit, i'd rather have 50 other copies of Antonica that all belong to the same Norrath and that i can travel to. There is no right or wrong answer. You prefer one, i prefer the other - probably for much the same reasons.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Originally posted by Velocinox Originally posted by xAPOCx Originally posted by Velocinox Originally posted by xAPOCx An open, full world with helpfull people and jerkoffs. Thats the game im hoping EQN will be.
So lock yourself in a room all alone. There will be four jerkoffs in that room.
You, and the thing you do three times a day.
What a worthless and stupid comment.
You didn't say untruthful...
Originally posted by xAPOCx Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Are people fighting for OPEN WORLD because of PvP? What if it's not a PvP server? Would that change your immersion level? (does seeing other groups fighting wolves while you kill bears make it more immersive?)
Ah, so it's just seeing them.
So if you are adventuring in the open world forest and people enter an open world dungeon, your enjoyment diminishes. Likewise, if you are exploring an open world dungeon and people leave to go adventure in the forest, your enjoyment diminishes.
How is that any different than those same adventures leaving to enjoy an instance/dungeon. Either way your enjoyment diminishes because you can't see them.
Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Originally posted by xAPOCx Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Are people fighting for OPEN WORLD because of PvP? What if it's not a PvP server? Would that change your immersion level? (does seeing other groups fighting wolves while you kill bears make it more immersive?)
Are you just trolling or something?
In one case you can play and interact with the other people, in the other you cannot.
Being surrounded by other players in a multiplayer game makes it more enjoyable, yes.
Oh brother. Dont be an ass. You know what im talking about here. Dont try and twist the post to suit rhetoric that you find faverable. Im not a politician and i wont play your game.
Its not that i don't see them. Its that i have seen them.
Originally posted by Velocinox Originally posted by Sovrath Whether it be a pvp experience such as cresting a hill where a known boss was only to not only discover your enemy but "your enemy in force" or a pve experience such as accidentally aggroing too many mobs and having passersby get you out of a tough spot.
I think in the earlier days (though scum bags abounded, believe me) there was less of the "not getting anything for helping" attitude.
You could meet future guild mates that way or they could help you and ask for help in a quest, etc.
Or, in one case, one of the guys needed help with a class quest where you really did need a raid group. You would get "the call" and you would go help in that raid.
The mmo space is diluted with players who don't necessarily share the attitude that some of the original adopters had.
Originally posted by DavisFlight Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Originally posted by xAPOCx Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Are people fighting for OPEN WORLD because of PvP? What if it's not a PvP server? Would that change your immersion level? (does seeing other groups fighting wolves while you kill bears make it more immersive?)
Interact how? That's what I'm not understanding. I asked earlier if this open world debate was PvP centric. Other than that or a quick "hey do you guys want to group" message, how are you interacting?
Originally posted by Sovrath Originally posted by Velocinox Originally posted by Sovrath Whether it be a pvp experience such as cresting a hill where a known boss was only to not only discover your enemy but "your enemy in force" or a pve experience such as accidentally aggroing too many mobs and having passersby get you out of a tough spot.
I agree. I was one that enjoyed helping others out. Being the train-wrecker at the entrance of Blackburrow. And having people come back in after zoning when they saw the train to see me and some other folks that stuck around standing there over a pile of 20 black furred gnolls. Fun stuff. But it just became a risk. Others stopped helping. Eventually it was just you, and you zoned, too. It was a different time. Just like it was a different time when people would help an accident victim, not pull out their camera phone to get a cool video of it.
Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Originally posted by DavisFlight Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Originally posted by xAPOCx Originally posted by Shadowguy64 Are people fighting for OPEN WORLD because of PvP? What if it's not a PvP server? Would that change your immersion level? (does seeing other groups fighting wolves while you kill bears make it more immersive?)
Ask the same question about real life. How do people you see every day impact the way you feel and behave? I know you're not really invested in this, you're mostly just spewing rhetoric for the sake of trying to win an argument. I've been there, I understand the need to be devil's advocate.
There's a huge difference between instanced and noninstanced worlds, both in terms of game design, game focus, linearity, and how the game gets played. In the broadest sense, MMOs that focus on instancing focus more on the elements that emulate singleplayer RPGs, and that's not what many of us want from MMOs. It's not just about seeing the other player.
Originally posted by Sleepy-Sleepee I'm an old school MMO'er starting back with UO and here's my take on the issue. I want EQN to have both open world dungeons and instance versions of the dungeons. Although I agree that too much instancing is bad thing for the community I still think wisely, lightly used instancing has it place and should be used when required (or limited see example I give a bit later). Old Sebilis had to be my favorite dungeon of all time, so I know the importance and would love to experience that atmosphere once again. I also wouldn't mind having the opportunity to have the entire zone to myself or my group(s) to see how far we could get on our own, you know see what we could accomplish. this sounds like private game time.. or Esport at least.. I also remember how fun pvp was in WOW before they put in BG's. They actually had better RPs reward for fighting in the BG than in the world which caused all the pvpers to funnel into them (sorry I forgot the actual term WOW used so RPS which maybe from DAOC). The world zones went to ghost towns for pvp action the only people left in the world were people trying to do their quest lines which made me feel like I was griefing. A good example of how an instance can be implemented: Let say a Dungeon is pretty much full of groups, and no established camps/rooms/areas are available let the players choose to create an instance version... As a deterrent in the instance version I would give all the Mobs increased hps ( maybe +15-20%), you could also ramp up the mobs dps or abilities, maybe you can turn off all the rare loot from dropping, and as a reward maybe if you clear the entire zone within a certain timeframe you can pick a your reward from any of the mobs loot tables in the zone- one time only per character of course no drop no trade.) no offense, but you are using one bad game design to justify another.. lets look at GW2 mechanics for example.. There is no camps taken by anyone.. Everyone is soft or hard grouped, therefore it's impossible to kill steal or ninja loot anyone.. You can not grief in GW2 with camping.. Using today's technology if more people come into an area, the spawn rate increases automatically and degree of difficulty increases as well.. Loot is all shared by anyone that is there and contributed to fighting.. Finally you can tie the opening of the instance into a class ability or better yet crafting, maybe you need some rare object that needs to be manipulate/harnessed.
Originally posted by Velocinox Originally posted by xAPOCx Originally posted by Velocinox Originally posted by xAPOCx Originally posted by Velocinox Originally posted by xAPOCx An open, full world with helpfull people and jerkoffs. Thats the game im hoping EQN will be.
Seems like that would have been your first reply, were it so.
I thought my response "worthless and Stupid" would have been enough. Congrats on even more meaningless responses.
Originally posted by arieste Originally posted by Phelcher
LOL.. there is no reason to line-item-veto me, just quote and use your own paragraphs. That is how adults converse.
U agree on 1st point.
On the 2nd point you make the exact case I am making. That a good use of instancing will leave you feeling a part of the real world, albeit in a somewhat special place... or not. Depending on how well instancing is used.
And your third colorful paragraph has no statement that rebuttals anything I've said, it is simply gibberish and sounds like you hate instancing, but like them? Weird//
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
I have played in open world dungeons where my group has saved others from wipe, rezd people, etc... IT can provide entertainment, from the look at that stupid thing they are doing, all the way to, wow, can't believe they did that...Sure that can all happen in the open world, but in the open world you are not in a more confined area, that is a dungeon....
If you didn't want to play with other people, why play a mmo? If you want most of what you do to be your own special world, it no longer is massive multiplayer imo, and not saying you are right, or I am right, these are all opinions, but everyone has a reason they like something...When LDoN first came out for EQ, it was different, and I didn't mind it so much, but when more and more content went that way, it was way too much and made me dislike playing it...I do not enjoy daily checklists either, it makes me feel like I have a to do list, instead of just getting on and doing what I want....Sure I could do that, but no one likes to 'gimp' themselves, atleast most don't and choose the non-optimal things to do for the most part..
In older style mmos, I did what was I felt like doing, and thought would be the most fun more, then I do in more modern mmos that are quest hub and checklist driven....It comes down to more than just that, but that is to make it short...So yeah I hope that they limit instances...If they want to do boss mob encounters as instances, and some smaller stuff, but 90-95% of the world content is non-instanced, then I can deal with it, it is when most content is phased or instanced, I usually don't want to play, and if that is what they were going for, then they are not doing too much new probably (as in different direction than the current trend).
The thing I like and miss about non instanced dungeons were when I went over to one to look for a group, if there was a spot open I would get in, or someone would see I was lfg and then would leave offering me a spot. With dungeons I could just hop in and play. Sure wait times could be long, but if they were I would find others lfg and make my own group.
Now with instancing, I can't just go and hop into a group because there are no groups around. All of them are full and inside alone already. There is no where for me to go. If I want to fight, I have to for my group first.
Usually easier when I know other singles are lfg at the dungeon or just filling a last spot. Of course there is now lfd teleport to instance right away, and while that gets people grouping, it makes the world feel even more empty. I also tend to encounter more asses in such scenarios than I do with forming groups in non instanced dungeons.
Of course lfd was created because no one was grouping in the instances unless for raids, where as people always grouped in dungeons before. It could be because later games were more quest hub based, but people always said the instances were better exp, yet people rarely did them, probably because it was so damn hard to start whole groups up at the locations since no one was around.
The funny thing is, with things like lfd system, I spend way more time waiting for a group than I did back in EQ. I played a ranger mostly, a class that could have a hard time getting a group. I rarely waited long to get a group. Waiting 30 minutes, maybe even an hour, then playing for the next 6 is way better than the 30+ minute queues for 15-30 minutes of game play to wait all over again, often encountering morons. Always love too after waiting a long time, someone does something stupid, causes people to die or just leaves early, then other abandon ship, forcing me to wait another 30 minutes with nothing done.
I find it funny someone jumps in and starts again about all players that want open world want it, to gank/grief or have an easy time pvp.
I like PVP, I don't like to play PVP. I like it's original concept, fighting for a reason, it could be to control a zone, control an area, control something, but not to get loot or be tucked away in an instance only to show you are better than someone else. Sure I see the use of an Arena, but why instanced? Just have players judge, no interference, have the decency not to try to cheat and not to interfere. You want to play esports, but don't want to follow the rules unless the game enforces it. But that's about pvp. So no I don't want non-instanced content to pvp, I probably will play on pve servers anyway.
I have said I'm against instancing, but that's not true of course. The real issue I have are devs who abuse instancing for cheap works. I'ts just that if you remove instances, the devs can't fall back on them and have to make real dungeons again. I do prefer open world dungeons, as many have said, you can help each other, you can guide people, help them get to their camp. How many times I've rested, gotten a heal, got help fighting a mob I accidently pulled.
And the comment about not getting anything. Everyone who significantly helped me, usually by porting or rezzing or buffing, I'd give a nice reward to. But it was never about money, or rewards. It's just that if I help you, someone will help me one day. Good Kharma system. And a lot of people did that. Because they knew, if I helped someone clear a train or buffed people, as a rogue dragged a corpse from the fallen monk to the group, I might get invited to the group when someone left. I even remember this dwarfen cleric who I asked to rezz me, he was a few zones away, he ran to the dungeon with his little feet and rezzed me no problem. After that I wanted to pay him, but he refused. He roleplayed his way out of receiving money, which was really cool, though I would have had no problem paying for his service. The problem is of course not everyone is nice, I realise that.
A lot of players compare original EQ design mistakes with open world dungeons and swear that that's the only way open dungeons can be. That's not true. I won't use GW2, because tbh I really think they failed really hard with their execution choices. Let's be honest here, it's a zergfest atm, because having 20+man who are not in any group work together is nearly impossible and the scaling is so horrible that everyone just hitting their best attacks work better than really coordinating. And let's also not forget that with no tanking and no real healing, everything turns into an zergfest anyway. But there are other ways to fix these issues that old school open dungeons did.
Spawn camping, not needed anymore. Make more random encounters, force players to keep moving, reduce the time needed to meditate. All those things contribute to a more mobile game. Now these are things you have to choose. Do you really want these features out of your game, or do you want to sit in a camp for hours, just chiling enjoying, talking to people while a monk is getting mobs for you.
Mob stealing can be fixed by tagging or rewards for everyone, but still very rarely it would happen in older games, because you didn't want to get the wrath of it and needed to do at least 51% dmg. I did fight a few mobs to get the rewards, but really I think if I had it happen 10 times in all my years is a lot. I do remember being leap frogged in VT by another guild and really ruining our night, oh I hate you. But the best time was when a rogue tried to steal our VT playtime, dragged his mage friend with him and a rez stick, rezzed his mage friend, who died to the mob that was patrolling, then the rogue died and we had all VT for ourselves. So yes it happens, no it didn't happen a lot and while it was frustating, I did remember it and have fun retelling it now.
Advanced tactics. Really advanced tactics, for bosses you can just lock the encounter to add a instanced feel to it, no one can target anyone who is locked in that combat, no friends, no mobs, neither of the two. No buffs, no heals. Only adds would attack them of course. Then you can always just add a range x AOE, you can place them in a room and have the room be affected. You can do well everything you do in a instanced game. A cave-in yes, kinda, but also not really. If you really want, you could do the phasing here Oh boy I hate phasing. You just let everyone in the party enter, but after the first enters the cave phases into cave-in state, not allowing people who are not part of the group to enter and once you are on the other side of the cave-in, it's caved in. People in the group are flagged for that adventure, adding new players won't work (why I hate cave-ins). Really, creative devs can solve problems. They are just lazy or busy with other things and not showing what they really can do. I'm not saying all and while I call it lazy, it's also just not using all their ideas and potential to fix these problems, most due to the managements desire to cut money.
But really, why I really prefer open over instanced. Well that's actually really easy. Adventuring in a dungeon. It's not the instance vs open discussion, but the way 99% of the instances are made. Instances are made with a story, an objective and a finish line. A dungeon is made with a story (usually not told, but written on the walls, in books, scrolls, item drops, mobs etc), a few rooms, a maze, maybe an end boss, but no finish line. But is the end boss not the finish? No it's not. When in an instance you defeat the last boss, you get a good job msg, or not, you could go back and kill in a wing you skipped, but you don't have to, mobs won't respawn and most of the players have hit the exit button just after the loot is distributed.
If instances would be bigger, allow more people to join, not private experiences, more dungeons per level point, add respawns etc. I wouldn't really mind them as much. But as of now I still prefer open dungeons. They add a real feel to the world. They add community. People helping each other. People bringing trains accidentely, maybe even whiping you, helping fight back to the camp. There are so many new exciting scenario's possible. Will open dungeons work today? I can't say, I would say why not. There are enough options to deal with issues mentioned and nothing other than money makes it's hard to do.
Originally posted by Waterlily Originally posted by Manakar You are confusing zones with instances as far as your comment about EQ having instances.. Instances are more private where zones anyone can come into it..
what are you talking about?
that's what they were...LDON, DON, DOD whole expansion were like that, they are 90% instanced private zones
OOW , GoD, PoR, group instances, they were like that
Everquest had completely instanced expansions. And they are fondly remembered as some of the best grouping and best expansions by plenty.
I want this. Just like it was in EQ1. People who are bitching about instances/zoning seriously dont understand how the mechanics worked in the original game. Not to mention a seemless world means you cant zone and lose the 10000 mobs that you agrod. Which means they will have to add rubberbanding mobs like WoW or any other game today.
My best experiences were in those instances.
Personally I see the side of people not wanting it when it comes to zones. At the same time if you want mass pop zones, it means also you are going to need tons of seperate server meaning less people, since players will get clustered in certain zones and cause massive lag issues which I feel is worst off then the compromise of channels. Its one of those things that while I don't really like, the benefits vastly outweigh the penalties of having 'channels' in a game, unless its going to be a very small and tight nit server community, which really not everyone likes.
If its instances as in dungeons, then I have issues with it. Most people either think...
A.) They don't want hard stuff and like it all open world so it becomes a trivial thing since it can easily be abused by players leaving no worry about 'traversing' the dungeon, 0 skill involved.
B.) They don't understand that opening up things that are suppose to be hard like dungeons with an MMO means that its going to be farmed out by others, making your progress inside practically useless, as someone can just jump into fray and pass you and take the loot, the dungeon diffiulty being completely ruined by it. There is NO WAY to prevent this in an open world setting unless its made into an 'event' which would still have that very same issue
Its just a horrid thing for those seeking difficulty in a game. In that case I do NOT see it as being a good thing at all. It trivializing the content. I feel though that a lot of that opinion might be just because MMOs lately HAVE trivialized their own instances, to the point its not about a challenge and more so something you breeze through which might be attributing to that attitude though.
Originally posted by KingsField There's room for both the traditional open-world dungeons of EverQuest and WoW-style instanced dungeons. Maybe make the open-world dungeons really huge and epic and make the instanced dungeons a small-scale experience for 6-man groups.
You Sir are a cad of the first order! There is no room on these forums for rationality and understanding. Please desist from attempting to derail an otherwise completely futile poo-flinging hatefest with your evenhanded and completely reasonable assertions!
The mere thought that instancing and open world could co-exist in the same game is ... is ... HERESY !
Next you'll be saying that it's just a game and the goal is fun. Crazytalk.
I read the title of this thread, but knew this was either a troll or someone who wouldn't grasp the problem if it was explained.
For the rest of rational humanity, instancing is bad for a number of reasons, but not the least of which is that they were created to eliminate the competitive factor that open world dungeons presented. The idea that not everyone is able to kill or obtain something at the same time makes for a much more realistic setting for a fantasy world. Its called exclusivity, and its been completely obliterated by mechanics like instances in order to make everyone feel like a winner. With that comes all the other problems like the economic issues stemming from the overabundance of items that are farmed all day long simultaneously.
The other personal problem I have with it is the fact that it splinters the world into a bunch of fake dimensions instead of allowing everyone to just exist in the same plane of reality. I like open world games. The idea that other people in the same world (server) are in the same place as me, in the same dungeon, yet I can't see them is just retarded.
Those are just a few of the literally 20+ problems that I have with instances, that I think others will most likely relate to.
and LOL at the best expansions in EQ being the ones with instances. Nobody who played classic everquest would think for a second that any expansion after kunark and velious did anything but suck in comparison. Sure, there was fun to be had, but they were nothing like the golden era of EQ.