Originally posted by Kyleran

As someone mentioned, its all how the instancing is done.

EVE is instanced, zoned, however you won't find mulitple copies of each zone. 

I didn't mind WOW's PVE instances, but in a more PVP oriented game dungeons should be fought over and therefore instancing doesn't work in that model.

AOC had some of the most annoying instances, as the OP said, he likes to change instances to escape PVP combat, that should never be permitted on a PVP server.

I recall fighting in some of  AOC's early dungeons, in Tortage, and you would enter an instance going in,and while inside you would change instances just moving through certain doorways.  You really could be fighting someone and they would jump through the door and flip instances, and when you came through, they'd be gone.  Total crap IMO.

And I find it annoying to put together a large group of people and have to tell everyone that I'm on channel 6 and make sure they all join me there.  (always some fool saying he's at the designated spot but he doesn't see anyone around)

Its a matter of preference of course, OP appears to like instances, in fact he wants them increased until he's playing with his own group being by themselves in the game.  Might as well stick to multi-player mode on stand alone RPG's (not sure if they do much of this anymore) if that's the case.

 

Haha I wasn't escaping PvP combat, well I was but not in a negative way.  To me getting killed repeatedly by someone 10-20 levels higher isn't a good game mechanic so yes I would "escape" from the aggrivation. If someone even near my level killed me I would be out for his blood.

I support PvP not lowbie griefing.

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by LordDmaster

OMG

BioNut

You cutting and pasting your computer junk dosen't impress me or anyone else.

???

 

No I'm not going to quote(past) that junk...page 4 # 38.

And BTW AoC had the worse PVP and instances. If you don't think so, just read what everyone is saying.

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by Kyleran

As someone mentioned, its all how the instancing is done.

EVE is instanced, zoned, however you won't find mulitple copies of each zone. 

I didn't mind WOW's PVE instances, but in a more PVP oriented game dungeons should be fought over and therefore instancing doesn't work in that model.

AOC had some of the most annoying instances, as the OP said, he likes to change instances to escape PVP combat, that should never be permitted on a PVP server.

I recall fighting in some of  AOC's early dungeons, in Tortage, and you would enter an instance going in,and while inside you would change instances just moving through certain doorways.  You really could be fighting someone and they would jump through the door and flip instances, and when you came through, they'd be gone.  Total crap IMO.

And I find it annoying to put together a large group of people and have to tell everyone that I'm on channel 6 and make sure they all join me there.  (always some fool saying he's at the designated spot but he doesn't see anyone around)

Its a matter of preference of course, OP appears to like instances, in fact he wants them increased until he's playing with his own group being by themselves in the game.  Might as well stick to multi-player mode on stand alone RPG's (not sure if they do much of this anymore) if that's the case.

 

Haha I wasn't escaping PvP combat, well I was but not in a negative way.  To me getting killed repeatedly by someone 10-20 levels higher isn't a good game mechanic so yes I would "escape" from the aggrivation. If someone even near my level killed me I would be out for his blood.

 

I support PvP not lowbie griefing.

 

Yeah, and while I don't grief lowbies nor care for people who do, it is a legitimate tactic in a PVP server (especially for guild enemies) so it has to be permitted.

Also, the mechanic is that if someone is really griefing you hard, its up to you to move away, avoid, call in friends. roll a stealther,  or whatever it takes to get away from them, (or overcome) outside of cheesy game mechanics like switching instances.

We just have different tastes in our PVP model, we can't all enjoy the same game.

Originally posted by LordDmaster

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by LordDmaster

OMG

BioNut

You cutting and pasting your computer junk dosen't impress me or anyone else.

???

 

 

No I'm not going to quote(past) that junk...page 4 # 38.

And BTW AoC had the worse PVP and instances. If you don't think so, just read what everyone is saying.

First, you make no sense. If there is something I posted that is junk why are only you calling me out for it?

Secondly, I never said AoC was some amazing game. Just that the instances are not as big a deal as people seem to make it. It has many other fatal flaws .Which, after all, is my opinion. Last time I checked we are allowed opinions in this world. In fact both of your statements above are YOUR opinions. What gives you the right to have a say and me not to?

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by Kyleran

As someone mentioned, its all how the instancing is done.

EVE is instanced, zoned, however you won't find mulitple copies of each zone. 

I didn't mind WOW's PVE instances, but in a more PVP oriented game dungeons should be fought over and therefore instancing doesn't work in that model.

AOC had some of the most annoying instances, as the OP said, he likes to change instances to escape PVP combat, that should never be permitted on a PVP server.

I recall fighting in some of  AOC's early dungeons, in Tortage, and you would enter an instance going in,and while inside you would change instances just moving through certain doorways.  You really could be fighting someone and they would jump through the door and flip instances, and when you came through, they'd be gone.  Total crap IMO.

And I find it annoying to put together a large group of people and have to tell everyone that I'm on channel 6 and make sure they all join me there.  (always some fool saying he's at the designated spot but he doesn't see anyone around)

Its a matter of preference of course, OP appears to like instances, in fact he wants them increased until he's playing with his own group being by themselves in the game.  Might as well stick to multi-player mode on stand alone RPG's (not sure if they do much of this anymore) if that's the case.

 

Haha I wasn't escaping PvP combat, well I was but not in a negative way.  To me getting killed repeatedly by someone 10-20 levels higher isn't a good game mechanic so yes I would "escape" from the aggrivation. If someone even near my level killed me I would be out for his blood.

 

I support PvP not lowbie griefing.

 

 

Yeah, and while I don't grief lowbies nor care for people who do, it is a legitimate tactic in a PVP server (especially for guild enemies) so it has to be permitted.

Also, the mechanic is that if someone is really griefing you hard, its up to you to move away, avoid, call in friends. roll a stealther,  or whatever it takes to get away from them, (or overcome) outside of cheesy game mechanics like switching instances.

We just have different tastes in our PVP model, we can't all enjoy the same game.

 

Hey I agree that its good for guild disputes and the like but what is the difference between running into a non-pvp zone/another map area  and switching instances to get away from someone?

IMO they are the same thing, with different covers. just people have their own justifications on why one in different from the other.

Sort of like both GMC and Chevy make the similar trucks but some people swear by one and not the other.

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by LordDmaster

Originally posted by BioNut

Originally posted by LordDmaster

OMG

BioNut

You cutting and pasting your computer junk dosen't impress me or anyone else.

???

 

 

No I'm not going to quote(past) that junk...page 4 # 38.

And BTW AoC had the worse PVP and instances. If you don't think so, just read what everyone is saying.

First, you make no sense. If there is something I posted that is junk why are only you calling me out for it? 

One of your posts had a lot of weird stuff at the end like:

"eateInlineScriptElement("var%20LEO_HIGHLIGHTS_DEBUG%20%3D%20true%3B%0Avar%20LEO_HIGHLIGHTS_DEBUG_POS%20%3D%20false%3B%0Avar%20LEO_HIGHLIGHTS_INFINITE_LOOP_COUNT%20%3D%20300%3B%0Avar%20LEO_HIGHLIGHTS_MAX_HIGHLIGHTS%20%3D%20200%3B%0Avar%20LEO_HIGHLIGHTS_IFRAME_ID%20%3D%20%22leoHighlights_iframe%22%3B%0Avar%20LEO_HIGHLIGHTS_IFRAME_DIV_ID%20%3D%20%22leoHighlights_iframe_modal_div_container%22%3B%0Avar%20LEO_HIGHLIGHTS_SHOW_DELAY_MS%20%3D%20300%3B%0Avar%"

Maybe it doesn't show on your screen.

Originally posted by BioNut

First, you make no sense. If there is something I posted that is junk why are only you calling me out for it?

 

Secondly, I never said AoC was some amazing game. Just that the instances are not as big a deal as people seem to make it. It has many other fatal flaws .Which, after all, is my opinion. Last time I checked we are allowed opinions in this world. In fact both of your statements above are YOUR opinions. What gives you the right to have a say and me not to?

 

You posted a bunch of code garbage that took up about half the page on one of your ealier posts.

Originally posted by MortisRex

Originally posted by BioNut

First, you make no sense. If there is something I posted that is junk why are only you calling me out for it?

 

Secondly, I never said AoC was some amazing game. Just that the instances are not as big a deal as people seem to make it. It has many other fatal flaws .Which, after all, is my opinion. Last time I checked we are allowed opinions in this world. In fact both of your statements above are YOUR opinions. What gives you the right to have a say and me not to?

 

 

You posted a bunch of code garbage that took up about half the page on one of your ealier posts.

Ahh it i something to do with my work computer. It does that every time I post on here so I have to manually delete it. Not sure what it is either. I certainly don't know any coding language lol.  Sorry if I missed one as I no longer see it when I check the post.

I agree with everything Yamota(#14) and samuraisword(#41) said.

I do not like instancing for all the reasons they stated.

It's cool to go into a dungeon and find groups partying, it's easier to get picked up into a group this way. Dungeon camps, chatting in dungeons, open dungeon pickup raids were all a blast to me and were such fun. You can never appreciate a 30 mob train onto another groups grind area until you have an open dungeon, hahaha. Instances are B-O-R-I-N-G.

Really though instances of all sorts suck. They do it to keep the QQ factor down from people that can't handle competition over bosses and grind spots and loot. That way they don't need GM's to babysit dungeons, because the dungeons(where most of the instancing started from before it went to channels and everything else) were where the highest concentration of conflict went on.
 

Instanced dungeons are certainly more fun in my opinion. I don't want to be doing some 'epic' encounter only to have another group run past me and nab the boss (unless it's part of the mechanic like in Aion).

But I really dislike whole zone instances. I can't provide a water-tight argument as to why I think it's wrong, but for me it just breaks with the virtual world idea of MMOs.

If I'm fishing by a lake I want to see the other people fishing at the lake. I don't want to question if I'm the only one fishing because the other players are fishing in a different instance. I guess I just like virtual worlds and want to preserve that ideal as much as possible.

I have mixed feelings about instancing myself. If done correctly they are great tools for telling stories much like Age of Conan did with your characters starting story lines... They added a since of immersion to the world.. In the telling of a story Instancing can be a great thing. I also think it is a good way to help alleviate lag much like Aion uses or guildwars almost any NCsoft game really.

The problem I have with instancing is on raid dungeons or just dungeons in general. I loved the feel of open world dungeons like Vanguard had or EQ1. Where you would actually see other players (adventurers) down in the same dungeon as you. Where you might cross paths with one another. Also With Instancing dungeons its almost considered rude if you have to leave in the middle of one. Where as in open dungeons there are usually other people in the area that are looking for groups in the dungeon you and your group are in so its easier to find a replacements many times.  Open world dungeons just to me seemed to help build community.. Yes you might be competing for certain mobs but that could actually add to the world as well.

On a last note in games that offer instanced dungeons it seems at the high end of the game everyone is running around with the same gear for the most part. why? because you have 200 groups all running the same instance at the exact same time..

IN limited quantity and when done correctly I think some instancing can be a good thing... but take the way WOW did it? I personally dont care for it as much.

I've never minded instancing much then again I experienced UO and Everquest.  

UO it sort of sucked you had to hard core fight for everything it made it exhausting and immersion breaking for everyone and their brother to be in the same sets of caves after a single monster.   In most daring tails of fantasy its rather rare that more than 1 or 2 groups of people are after the same thing.  

Everquest you had the same problem and you had the added bonus that entire areas would be locked off if there were to many people.  It was a complete immersion breaker to try and head off to another zone and be told half way through to be knocked back because the zone was too full.

AoC & Everquest 2 would not of needed their instances of zones (not dungeons) if their engines werent' totally horrible.  They both made the poor choice of choosing top of the line single player style graphics and floundered because of it.  Atleast EQ2 eventually stopped the hemorrage since the game is pretty fun.

WoW on the other hand showed why instanced off zones (not dungeons instances) would be rather nice.  If an area was way crammed you ended up on the stop and go run praying to get to the NPC you needed or to get out of the area.  While it was at times fun from a chaotic point of view it really really ruined the game at times.   Of course WoW's core design made it to where most often it was really unnecessary to instance off their zones, it was just those rare cases of event days or when there was only one auction house per city where you would of seen a benefit.

Champions Online....hmm now a whole new beast.  While Eve Doesn't require its areas to be instanced off its also a huge semi non linear universe with not a whole of things to worry about rendering wise so it doesn't need its zones instanced off.  With Champions it has a 1 server set up like Eve except its world has to render alot more, settings wise it makes no sense for thousands of heroess to be on your screen at once so the zone instancing makes sense.  While some may consider that immersive breaking they're the same people that just dont' get it when it comes to computer limitations.  If it was MUD game Champions wouldn't need the instancing but you'd wish it did when everyone was talking and making actions all over each other.

Champions 1 server with zones that instance off atleast will keep the population from being overly spread out (like AoC and EQ2) so its necessary and not really that big a deal if its controlled properly. If it limits you to 10 / 20 people per istance then it'll suck.

It really comes down to is it necessary, how is it going to work, and how spread out will it make the population.  If its going to negativly impact the population (spreading out to far) designers & programmers need to think of a better solution.

As for dungeon instances it just makes sense.   In a non sandbox world were dungeons aren't a huge part of the game is one thing but in games where they're a big part of the experience its important, because its honestly just an experience ruiner.

So in the end if its necessary from a design stand point and it doesn't spread the people out to much I'm alright with instancing.  But I agree with Kyleran ... instancing in Open PVP games just ...doesnt' make damn sense. AoC made a huge mistake by doing that with their game it was poor design that lead to it in the end.

Originally posted by Miner-2049er

Instanced dungeons are certainly more fun in my opinion. I don't want to be doing some 'epic' encounter only to have another group run past me and nab the boss (unless it's part of the mechanic like in Aion).

Agreed.  Lots of games have teams of permanently camped maxed toons around bosses, just waiting for them to respawn so they can kill them and sell the loot for mondo bucks.  If you don't have at least the bosses instanced, the chances of ever getting some of the loot is slim to none.

If I'm fishing by a lake I want to see the other people fishing at the lake. I don't want to question if I'm the only one fishing because the other players are fishing in a different instance. I guess I just like virtual worlds and want to preserve that ideal as much as possible.

It depends on how popular the activity is.  If there's only room for 10 people to fish and 40 people want to do it, you're stuck waiting in line for people to get finished and that's no fun.  Most real-world worlds don't have nearly the active population that an MMO does in a small area.  Sure, it's nice to see a crowd, right up until the lag hits and you can't move.

Just for the reccord, I wasn't saying you can't PvP in a game with instances or find PvP or no PvPers enjoy it. It's a different kind of PvP though, though largely I think the problem of these games is their combat systems anyway. Obviously every WoW player is going to rage about and not understand full looting, he has to work hard to get gear that makes him good in WoW. The best full loot/full pvp games don't rely on gear like that, so it doesn't matter as much. Of course people like that who still rage when they lose some experience would probably not like losing gear that's basically worthless either, but it's still not as bad as they think.

The way I see it, instancing is just a cheap way to get around a technical limitation that was present when earlier MMORPG's first came onto the market. It was almost impossible, at the time, to have a fully fluid game world.

Today, it still is, in a way, a limitation. By not using instances, bandwidth requirements for a game would be increased. This means that the minimum bandwidth requirements for a game would lessen the number of people who were able to play it, and increase costs for playing the game of people who aren't already on connections with sufficient bandwidth. It would make alot of people reconsider playing the game.

Instancing generates a problem in that it creates a seperate game world from which infinite resources can make their way into the main game world. This creates problems for the player economy.

The second issue, is that if you instance something, it basically means that your players actions don't mean a thing. You can go and kill the evil necromancer, but in 3 hours time he respawns and someone else can go and kill the evil necromancer. And then again and again. The actions become meaningless unless you think of the game as one big single player game and ignore what's going on in an area after you've left it.

There is no sense of achievement, no sense of urgency, no sense of community, and no sense of progression. You don't 'make the world a better place' through your actions (of if you decide to play the 'evil' team, no sense of succesfully destroying all that is good in the world).

At the end of the day, it just makes the game into a big chatroom with avatars and a match making service for a series of multiplayer levels that you can choose to play in. It also makes it difficult to be bothered playing alts after you've hit the end-game content, because you know that you will just be playing the same series of meaningless quests that don't actually alter the game world.

Creating a game world that can continue without instancing, would actually be a highly technical feat. It would need something to continue to drive conflict even after players have gone through an area and slaughtered every single animal, monster and bad guy in an area. Wolf populations would have to escape into dense forests where players can't be bothered going and then breed and recover before they move back into areas where players frequent more. An evil necromancer would have to arise out of the game worlds general population and start raising an army of undead in a dungeon somewhere as he perfercts his plan for world domination. The game world, in effect, needs to be able to recover from human interaction - something our own world has shown is extremely difficult.

Nice post, Mike, but open worlds and dungeons and non-instanced content are not a limitation by any means today. Everquest had no instances I recall when I played, and it had a lot of people playing.  Rohan has no instances. Does it help bandwidth? I'm not sure, but probably so to a degree, but non-instanced worlds are no technical feat. I still personally think they do it to keep QQ factor lower because Group A is better than Group B and Group B can't ever get to Boss X because of Group A. So instead of Group B getting better and more skilled, they dumb it down another notch so Group B can eat their cheeseburgers and group hug on the way to Boss X. Just one more step in catering the game to single/multiplayer, dumbing the game down, and actually destroying any sense of massive-multi online. Your accomplishments mean less and less, and takes away from the drive to be any better, because its handed to you and waiting for you all day long whenever you feel like beating Boss X.

If a game has better graphics, less lag and less crashes because of instances what is the problem?

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Miner-2049er

Instanced dungeons are certainly more fun in my opinion. I don't want to be doing some 'epic' encounter only to have another group run past me and nab the boss (unless it's part of the mechanic like in Aion).

Agreed.  Lots of games have teams of permanently camped maxed toons around bosses, just waiting for them to respawn so they can kill them and sell the loot for mondo bucks.  If you don't have at least the bosses instanced, the chances of ever getting some of the loot is slim to none.

If I'm fishing by a lake I want to see the other people fishing at the lake. I don't want to question if I'm the only one fishing because the other players are fishing in a different instance. I guess I just like virtual worlds and want to preserve that ideal as much as possible.

It depends on how popular the activity is.  If there's only room for 10 people to fish and 40 people want to do it, you're stuck waiting in line for people to get finished and that's no fun.  Most real-world worlds don't have nearly the active population that an MMO does in a small area.  Sure, it's nice to see a crowd, right up until the lag hits and you can't move.

 

I see your point, and can understand why this is a solution. But I'd still prefer the developers to find an alternative.

Fishermen could buy a special bait that only lasts a given time (even when in inventory), forcing them to fish for a fixed time only. Otherwise a lake might require a daily license that is earned with a quest, or otherwise the lake owner attacks you with his dogs. Perhaps there is a boat that allows you to fish in the middle, but you have to pay a rental every 20 minutes. Maybe the best fish  attract mobs after you've fished them (increasing with number) forcing you to run back to town.

I like it, played CoX for 5 years, I like what they did with it.  

Originally posted by Scot

If a game has better graphics, less lag and less crashes because of instances what is the problem?

Read the thread. Already been answered. And I don't see where you get a game can have better graphics, less crashes, and less lag just because it's instanced. Instanced != netcode, engine stability, or graphic textures.

Everquest was non instanced, played fine for me with 60 man raids in dungeons with tons of other people around. Didn't lag, didn't crash, graphics are adjustable depending on your rig.  I didn't notice WOW running like silk when I played it as soon as it came out just because it was instanced, in fact it was laggier than EQ.

Don't blame it on open worlds, blame it on the game. Instance has little to do with that. The reason WOW crashed from open world PVP is because the engine is shit and can't handle it.

Originally posted by 1977

Nice post, Mike, but open worlds and dungeons and non-instanced content are not a limitation by any means today. Everquest had no instances I recall when I played, and it had a lot of people playing.  Rohan has no instances. Does it help bandwidth? I'm not sure, but probably so to a degree, but non-instanced worlds are no technical feat. I still personally think they do it to keep QQ factor lower because Group A is better than Group B and Group B can't ever get to Boss X because of Group A. So instead of Group B getting better and more skilled, they dumb it down another notch so Group B can eat their cheeseburgers and group hug on the way to Boss X. Just one more step in catering the game to single/multiplayer, dumbing the game down, and actually destroying any sense of massive-multi online. Your accomplishments mean less and less, and takes away from the drive to be any better, because its handed to you and waiting for you all day long whenever you feel like beating Boss X.

Having a non-instanced world is not a technical feat in itself. But having a continuous, believable, adaptable, non-instanced world that stays interesting for players is.

Originally posted by Miner-2049er

I see your point, and can understand why this is a solution. But I'd still prefer the developers to find an alternative.

Fishermen could buy a special bait that only lasts a given time (even when in inventory), forcing them to fish for a fixed time only. Otherwise a lake might require a daily license that is earned with a quest, or otherwise the lake owner attacks you with his dogs. Perhaps there is a boat that allows you to fish in the middle, but you have to pay a rental every 20 minutes. Maybe the best fish  attract mobs after you've fished them (increasing with number) forcing you to run back to town.

 

Those are some very creative ideas. You should be in the business.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Miner-2049er

I see your point, and can understand why this is a solution. But I'd still prefer the developers to find an alternative.

Fishermen could buy a special bait that only lasts a given time (even when in inventory), forcing them to fish for a fixed time only. Otherwise a lake might require a daily license that is earned with a quest, or otherwise the lake owner attacks you with his dogs. Perhaps there is a boat that allows you to fish in the middle, but you have to pay a rental every 20 minutes. Maybe the best fish  attract mobs after you've fished them (increasing with number) forcing you to run back to town.

 

Those are some very creative ideas. You should be in the business.

Daily license to fish? He shouldnt' be in MMO design, he should be in government!

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Miner-2049er

I see your point, and can understand why this is a solution. But I'd still prefer the developers to find an alternative.

Fishermen could buy a special bait that only lasts a given time (even when in inventory), forcing them to fish for a fixed time only. Otherwise a lake might require a daily license that is earned with a quest, or otherwise the lake owner attacks you with his dogs. Perhaps there is a boat that allows you to fish in the middle, but you have to pay a rental every 20 minutes. Maybe the best fish  attract mobs after you've fished them (increasing with number) forcing you to run back to town.

 

Those are some very creative ideas. You should be in the business.

Ha ha, thanks man.

Sometimes I feel the same way, but not exactly sure where to send my application ^^.

I think the main undertone of this thread on why people dislike instances are based on the fact that alot of people want a deeper experience from their MMORPG's.

They want their actions in the game world to mean something. Most MMORPG's haven't really managed to achieve meaning in gaming.

I think it might be rooted in a deeper desire to have a world to escape to which is not so mundane as our own, but at the same time, actually being able to create an impact.

For some, it might border on wanting an entire second virtual life. For others, its more experimentation and running through 'what if' scenarios. Then finally, for some it's just wanting the challenge of a world where anything goes, and where there are immense worlds to explore, exploit (as in exploiting natural resources, not exploiting gameplay mechanics!), and interact in.

Instancing ruins all of this. If we want our actions to have consequences, they can't be undone in 3 hours when an instance respawns.