It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Distortion0Most people want 50/50? Are you out of your minds? Does anyone else feel that half instanced is enough to ruin the feeling that you are in a huge world with thousands of other players when playing an MMO?
Most people want 50/50? Are you out of your minds? Does anyone else feel that half instanced is enough to ruin the feeling that you are in a huge world with thousands of other players when playing an MMO?
Are you generally scared when people have a different opinion than yours? I'm so tired of such an attitude and it's the main reason why I've stopped posting in these boards as frequently as I have.
Some people (incl. me) prefer a non-instanced world because of the immersion it offers. Others prefer instances because of the gameplay advantages. Not everyone has the same taste and there is no right or wrong way to make an MMORPG; it's only a matter of satisfying different target audiences.
I see the same old whining all the time, from people who are too blind to see that the MMOG market is growing and expanding. Vanguard: SOH will be released this year and will satisfy the no-instances crowd. DDO, on the other hand, has already been released for the instancing crowd. There's a growing variety of games to choose from and certainly no need to hear the same complaints or the same doom preaching over and over again.
Currently playing: * City of Heroes: Deggial, Assault Rifle/Devices Blaster. Server: Defiant. * City of Villains: Snakeroot, Plant/Thorns Dominator. Server: Defiant.
Originally posted by busdriver
Originally posted by deggilator Originally posted by Distortion0Most people want 50/50? Are you out of your minds? Does anyone else feel that half instanced is enough to ruin the feeling that you are in a huge world with thousands of other players when playing an MMO?
It's not that most people posting against instancing are unaccepting of other playstyle choices. If someone likes instancing because it allows them to not interact with others then fine, but what I mostly hear is they want to interact with others, yet want to avoid the crowding/camping issues.
Well as explained by myself and others who have offered several solutions, there are much better ways of dealing with those problems than by breaking other important aspects of a MMOG, interaction in a seemless world, reasonable competition for resources and rewards instead of flooding the market, etc.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it." Brad McQuaidChairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroeswww.vanguardsoh
Originally posted by JorevI find it amazing that the single most popular defense of instancing is to remove spawn camping.That just proves that instancing is a developer's lazy way of dealing with the issue and that players who prefer instancing really don't like MMOGs. That's fine, but just admit that games that are heavily instanced are not true MMOGs. If you don't want to share the game world with other people, which realistically will include some competition for resources and rewards, as it should be, then games like GW, CoV-CoH, DDO etc are what you want, but please don't suggest these games represent true MMOGs or that instancing has a valid place in all MMOGs.The intelligent way to avoid spawn camping is by removing predictable drops and by not limiting them to a specific mob. How hard is that? If high end loot has the possibility of dropping from many higher end mobs, you shouldn't constantly see lines for specific mobs. You can still increase/decrease the drop ratios for certain items by mob type or boss mob in order to influence traffic into a certain dungeon or zone, but by sharing the loot table with other high end spawns, you remove the linear bottlenecks of early MMOGs which are retarded.You will never see killstealing if the person who makes first contact has looting rights. This is a no-brainer. If your arguement is that you came upon a spawn first but hesitated in order to prep or plan or call your friends over an unrealistic chat channel or worse, a live communication system, to come join you because uber mob has spawned, then too bad, deal with it.Instancing does more damage to a game's fun and economy by promoting relentless farming.
Currently Playing: Dungeons and Dragons Online.Sig image PendingStill in: A couple Betas
Originally posted by ross1893Fair enough I decided, so what would replace this fundamental aspect ofmost recent MMOs? Well, this is where the designers really displayedsome innovation; they have come up with a concept called “encounterrealms”, which are basically open instances. The way this system worksis that a group of players start down a path towards an in-game questor boss. Along their way, they perform certain actions, which arerequired in order to meet the end goal. Since all of this happens inthe open world, once this group reaches the goal, it belongs to them,regardless of any other players waiting at the end for the boss tospawn or treasure to appear. Only those that have completed therequirements along the path can claim the prize. This system works topromote the social aspect that Sigil Games is going for; along the way,if this group gets ambushed somehow, any other group that happens to bein the area can lend a hand. http://www.gamingexcellence.com/pc/games/379/preview.shtmlThe guy compares Vanguard to Guild Wars which makes no sense to me. Yet the idea seems like it would fix the camping problem.
I loved EQ1 prior to Planes of Power and it had no instancing at all back then.
Sure I would get pissed if I wanted a certain drop and it was camped, but sometimes it was an opportunity to work together and meet another player or group of players, sometimes it wasn't because they were pricks, but if I knew there was a chance to get the same drop from another high end mob, I wouldn't be upset about that certain mob being camped, even if it was known that the camped mob in question had a higher percentage drop rate.
Most players will want to experience all content for the fun of it regardless of wether a specific mob dropped a specific item. As long as the higher end mobs drop good loot, there is a materialistic motivation as well, and if loot tables are shared, there is more flexibility to satisfy different class/character needs. Most of us have participated in dungeon crawls to retreive items that were class/character specific for friends, knowing there would be no reward for ourselves other than helping a friend, which is fine, but shared loot tables would be more equitable.
Instancing removes any competiton for resources and rewards and floods the market which creates inflation and devalues those items. That is a serious problem. It is both reasonable and healthy to have a certain amount of competition for rewards and resources, in order to maintain their value in the economy and to keep the experience of earning something real and special. Instancing cheapens the experience by allowing you to summon a protected enclosure over and over again thus making it both unrealistic and the outcome predictable.
Originally posted by JorevI find it amazing that the single most popular defense of instancing is to remove spawn camping.That just proves that instancing is a developer's lazy way of dealing with the issue and that players who prefer instancing really don't like MMOGs. That's fine, but just admit that games that are heavily instanced are not true MMOGs.
You're got that MMO brain damage, I see. People who don't like a moronic, non-immersive aspect of some current MMOGs do not neccesarily dislike MMOGs in general. And not wanting a mornic, non-immersive aspect
If you don't want to share the game world with other people, which realistically will include some competition for resources and rewards, as it should be,
The thing people like you refuse to acknowledge is that people don't want STUPID competition with other players. "Quickly! let's see who can click on that mob first when it appears!" "Alright, now we'll see who can wait for longer in this one spot for this mob to appear."
You will never see killstealing if the person who makes first contact has looting rights. This is a no-brainer.
Instead you get an excellent competition of 'who can click on the mob first', which actualy gets won by the person using a bot to autohit the mob. And people who sit around just to tag whatever mob someone else wants.
And wait - this sounds like you don't want to share the game world with other people, which will realisitically include some competition for resources and rewards, as it should be, in spite of what you said earlier. Why should you get to loot it for free, wouldn't it be more realisitic if, after weakening yourself fighting the dragon, the people who snuck up during your fight came in and kiled your weakened party and took the loot for themselves? Sounds like you don't want a true MMO.
If your arguement is that you came upon a spawn first but hesitated in order to prep
God forbid that you actually face an opponent tough enough that you need to prepare in an MMO! Just tag the spawn and take your challengeless kill!
or plan or call your friends over an unrealistic chat channel or worse, a live communication system, to come join you because uber mob has spawned, then too bad, deal with it.
So you've got a world with wizards hurling fireballs, necromancers magically animating the dead, 50 foot demons and warriors that can take multiple hits from them without dying, people that can run constantly for days without tiring, people that don't actually die but just spawn back at a graveyard and make some kind of a corpse run, pants that make you more intelligent, and monsters that watch you kill through a field of them one by one without responding, but somhow any kind of magical long-distance communitication qualifies as unrealisitc? And your complaint is really foolish in modern or science fiction game; 'the jedi blocking blaster bolts with his lightsaber used a comlink, that's just unrealisitc'.
Further, it's just silly to use 'that's unrealistic' as an argument when you're talking about an absurdly unrealistic situation to begin with. When you're talking about a creature that was killed, but then magically reappears alive a short while later, and once someone hits it once no one else can take anything off of the body, it's just nuts to complain that someome communicating with their buddies is unrealistic.
Instancing does more damage to a game's fun and economy by promoting relentless farming.
According to a declaration by you, however there seems to be a distinct lack of any kind of logical argument behind the statement.
I am just going to address the last statement because that is my main complaint about instancing and why it effects me negatively, the rest we can chalk up as a difference in perspective.
How you can deny that instancing creates inflation and ruins the economy is mind-boggling. The proof is what instancing does. It allows a player to recall a private experience where the loot can be retreived over and over again without competition. It is a limitless cash cow.
Originally posted by Jorev I find it amazing that the single most popular defense of instancing is to remove spawn camping.
What thread are you reading? The most common reason given for preferring instances is immersion. Spawn camping has only entered into it because having to wait in line to camp a spawn is one of the things that destroys the immersion of the game.
Originally posted by TithrielleOriginally posted by baffToo many times I would be in missions in areas that would have worked better if instanced (temples castles etc), but instead had to deal with kill stealing and camping and respawning enemies materialising in the middle of the fight for no reason at all.
Originally posted by JorevHow you can deny that instancing creates inflation and ruins the economy is mind-boggling. The proof is what instancing does. It allows a player to recall a private experience where the loot can be retreived over and over again without competition. It is a limitless cash cow.
First off, that's not the claim I disagreed with. You said "Instancing does more damage to a game's fun and economy by promoting relentless farming;" the above doesn't say one word about how instancing promotes "relentless farming," what you wrote above is quite different. I will also note that, as usual on these boards, you neglected to actually explain how inflation "ruins the economy"; a healthy game economy is just not going to be static, especially when the game moves from 'everyone's a newb' times to 'everyone's at cap' times. So I'll just focus on the idea that instancing causes inflation, since that's the only one of your claims you've provided an argument for.
Your criticism of instancing as a 'limitless cash cow' has two major problems. The biggest one is that instances can be designed to put money into the economy or to take it out, there's nothing inherant in instancing that says you have to make money each time you go into an instance. As a trivial example, if I made an instance where you pay 100 gold for the key get in or the components to summon the demon, and I set the loot tables so that the vendor value of all drops will be less than 50 gold, every time you run that instance you take at least 50 gold out of the economy.
The other huge problem is that MMOs are filled with 'limitless cash cows'. There are mobs all over the place that drop money and vendor trash that you can retrieve loot from over and over, there are herbs and minerals to be harvested, and quests/missions to complete. Even if a game's instances produce a profit, you can't blame inflation in the game on instances unless the instances are better money producers than other sources. Same thing with running them 'over and over'; it's just not a valid complaint when most of the content in the game can be run repeatedly. And there's inherant about instances that says they can be repeated more quickly than outside content; you can easily have an instance that saves its state for some appropriate period.
Plus, your use of 'loot' is a bit off. In general, when people camp spawns they're looking for a particular item drop, not a cash drop. Cash drops contribute to inflation, useful item drops contribute to deflation by increasing the supply (econ 101 supply and demand at work here). If I can get all of my gear by going off and fighting for it (especially if the best gear isn't sellable), then the game discourages 'relentless farming' since I will have lesst need to farm cash for anything. Spawn camp games are the ones that seem to encourage 'relenltess farming', since you can't realistically beat someone camping a spot 24/7 and using a macro to get the first tag; you're forced to farm gold to buy the gear from the campers.
Joined - July 2004
Are we arguing about gear and non persistant quests? How dumb.
A lot of people say these MMO's are just games, and those same people would call me Loony for saying that some are more than that for me. But i've played my fair share of games from Ultima online, EQ, swg, daoc, you name it(no, I haven't played the lineage titles though )
Most people see me as an Ultima online fanboi, but it's for good reason. I think we coudl learn a lot from Ultima online, even though it was one of the first mmo sucesses, maybe becuase there really weren't any other choices besides Meridian 59. But that game just seemed to work with no instancing, it wasn't a gear dependant game for the most part, people found roleplaying easy to do, and despite 1337's and kiddies, it was a fulfilling game.
Now I have some crazy views on the RP in MMo's. I feel that in almost every MMO community and the game itself matter a whole lot, you're Rping, but in a different culture and way than you thought you might. The culture built up around these games have pretty much been destroyed ever since by increasingly different games than the ones we looked up to and fantasized about some 10 years ago, especially with "The industry" coming in and putting subscriber quota's and demanding immediate revenue. THe problem with mmorpgs is that they have been commercialized. THis happened in the Music scene as well, everything once underground has been made popular for exploitation.
im gonna end here, and update when I get home from work.
Originally posted by JorevHow does instancing preserve immersion, if it creates a private experience separate from the game world for just you and friends? You need to explain the logic for me.
You're using immersion to mean something like 'seamless world' or 'no load screens', while other people are using it to mean 'gives the impression of being in an actual world instead of a game'.
instancing is a feature that, if used well, gives the subscriber a sense of being the protaganist.
it greatly improves "my" immersion during quests and different situations.
the guy above me, I agree 100%. however I dont think I could give a specific percentage on how much instancing I like.
I like instancing when its used to put me into the story.
camping and waiting in line to assassinate a named mob, this should never exist in a true roleplaying game. neither should crossing the path of an important mob (named) that you slayed previously.
instancing is slowly evolving into something where players can finally feel important, and quests/objectives will feel complete once the player has finished their quest. its all in how the developers incorporate instancing.
some of you think very shallow when it comes to the possibilities of game instancing.
I think that the moment you add respawning bosses and players lined up waiting to tag them for their turn at getting an item, you turn what might have been a believeable world into a game. I can ignore respawns, but not when I have to get into line with other people to wait for one. I can ignore that I'm only temporarily incapacitating the leader of the orcs if I fight my way to him, kill him, and fight out, but not if I fight in, see another group, wait for them to finish, stand around until the leader magically reappears, then kill him myself.
And don't even get me started on the half-assed 'competition'; if you want to compete with other players for spawns, you should really compete with them by having full PVP combat, and should have the risk that you kill the mob but another group kills you while you're weak and loots the body. You can't sensible talk about how people who don't like spawn camping silliness want a world where "everything is set out for you" and boast about "adapting to the world" when you aren't willing to seriously compete for a spawn with other players and prefer some silly queue or whack-a-mole to tag it first.
I think that the moment you add respawning bosses and players lined up waiting to tag them for their turn at getting an item, you turn what might have been a believeable world into a game. I can ignore respawns, but not when I have to get into line with other people to wait for one.
I can ignore that I'm only temporarily incapacitating the leader of the orcs if I fight my way to him, kill him, and fight out, but not if I fight in, see another group, wait for them to finish, stand around until the leader magically reappears, then kill him myself.