The deciding factor, for me, will be if this game is zoned. Probably that and that alone. I know that zones are required when changing major areas (such as planets or something), but if every area on a single planet is zoned, I most definitely will not be playing.

Does anyone know if the game is zoned? By zoning, the best examples of what I mean are:

-Age of Conan

-Final Fantasy XI

-Aion

By no zones, I mean:

-WoW

-Vanguard

-Lotro

Even if there are little zones like into houses or into areas like battlegrounds (or other instances), then that isn't a problem. But if every area is zoned I won't be playing.

That being said,

I'm still extremely excited for this game.

So don't think I'm a troll or something.

WoW may not use zoning, but it does use phasing. I'm sure some of the major turning points or quests will be instanced, for example, the flashpoint video they have demonstrated. I would prefer them to be instanced though, I would rather do a quest like that with a handful of friends with out the distraction of others. Could you imagine a bunch of people waiting to kill or save the captain? Kinda kills the immersion if you ask me.

But to answer your question more direct, they said the world(s) will be open. But keep in mind flashpoints and decide if those things work for you.

They said it will be open-world in their MMOGamer interview.

 Also still to early to tell becuase no information has been released on the planets other than what and where they are and what kind of diversesity each planet will hold.

I hear the Hero Engine allows entirely new ways of zoneless worlds, or somesuch. You should dig about that, I am sure somewhere is something about the powers of the Hero Engine.

Given the story heavy nature of the game some parts must be zoned/instanced, but how much in the end, its impossible to really say.

Zoned and instanced are not the same things. Zoned, as the name suggests,simply  means that the world is seperated into different zones, with loading times between them, where as instanced means that the world creates multiple identical areas limited to X number of people and in some cases, private to you or your group.

Games can have zones (EQ, Eve) but no instances and you can have instances but not zones (WoW). Not having zones simply means that moving around the world is fluid with no noticeable entering/exiting.

Mortal Online, allegedly, will have neither zones nor instances.

Personally I dont mind zones, those can be explained in the context of the world (such as travel time or whatever) but instancing I dont completely ruins the MMORPG experience. How can you justify identical copies of the same area in the same world? Maybe in a Matrix type of game but not otherwise.

A few good MMO's has used completely open worlds which I like but the world was fairly small.   I picture SWTOR to be lots different from LOTRO & WoW because there won't be swords, shields & horses with a few huts scattered about.   There will be massive cities with space crafts flying about so unless you want most people PC's buckling under the graphical pressure you better hope they add needful zoning, less is sometimes more & bigger isn't always better.

We don't know. They haven't said.

We dont know enough yet unfortuntely, but they did say it would be open world. Bioware hasnt done me wrong. I hope there are minimal instancing/zones.

(AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH dances with Jaina Solo)

Previous BioWare games have had massive amounts of zoning - even walking in and out buildings required you to sit at a loading screen. They're not using their own engine this time though, and it's a different beast than their previous games, so who knows.

Originally posted by Yamota

Zoned and instanced are not the same things.

If you was talking to me, I know that. I was just warning him that if he doesn't like zoning, he might not like the instance system they may be using. So all though the world is claimed to be opened, some of the points in the game won't be.

I see them using a lot of instanced quests for SWTOR. Some might see that do be bad or restricting, I see it as a great thing. That of course is if it is how I think it will be.

Based on what I've seen/read, I would expect LotRO level of zoning, but it's still speculation.

Originally posted by Yamota

Zoned and instanced are not the same things. Zoned, as the name suggests,simply  means that the world is seperated into different zones, with loading times between them, where as instanced means that the world creates multiple identical areas limited to X number of people and in some cases, private to you or your group.

Games can have zones (EQ, Eve) but no instances and you can have instances but not zones (WoW). Not having zones simply means that moving around the world is fluid with no noticeable entering/exiting.

Mortal Online, allegedly, will have neither zones nor instances.

Personally I dont mind zones, those can be explained in the context of the world (such as travel time or whatever) but instancing I dont completely ruins the MMORPG experience. How can you justify identical copies of the same area in the same world? Maybe in a Matrix type of game but not otherwise.

Good explaination but I'd say there is another criteria as well.  Zones aren't always requiring a loading screen.  Sometimes you zone transparently...  So how is that different from zoneless?  zoned games are made up of interconnected closed areas. So wow and lotro are a zone based games.  In that when you are in a zone you are in a contained region with artifical walls around you.  This lets the game limit resources it needs to track and limits the graphic resources it needs to maintain.  Zones typically look different and have a limited set of objects specific to that zone.  ie the number of different types of creatures, objects, structures etc.  Wow uses a clever zoning system where they create like tunnels between the zones or transition areas.  So you are zoning it just doesn't create a pause or zoning screen.

An open game isn't designed with any limits or constraints.  UO and Vanguard are examples.  I don't recall but I think AC was like this too.  These world feature the ability to move in an direction indefinitely within the limits of what is normal.  They still have chunks of realistate that you get shifted between but it isn't designed to effect the design of the world.  The worlds are more naturally designed.

Originally posted by ethion

An open game isn't designed with any limits or constraints.  UO and Vanguard are examples.  I don't recall but I think AC was like this too. 

Yes, Asheron's Call was also an open game. You could travel all the way from one end of the world (and the world was HUGE) to the other end without seening a single loading screen, although it would take you a very long time to travel over that distance. The only times you saw loading screens was logging into or out of the game and when you used a portal.

Originally posted by Yamota

Zoned and instanced are not the same things. Zoned, as the name suggests,simply  means that the world is seperated into different zones, with loading times between them, where as instanced means that the world creates multiple identical areas limited to X number of people and in some cases, private to you or your group.

Games can have zones (EQ, Eve) but no instances and you can have instances but not zones (WoW). Not having zones simply means that moving around the world is fluid with no noticeable entering/exiting.

Mortal Online, allegedly, will have neither zones nor instances.

Personally I dont mind zones, those can be explained in the context of the world (such as travel time or whatever) but instancing I dont completely ruins the MMORPG experience. How can you justify identical copies of the same area in the same world? Maybe in a Matrix type of game but not otherwise.

WoW has zones and uses instances.

Originally posted by GPrestige

The deciding factor, for me, will be if this game is zoned. Probably that and that alone. I know that zones are required when changing major areas (such as planets or something), but if every area on a single planet is zoned, I most definitely will not be playing.

Does anyone know if the game is zoned? By zoning, the best examples of what I mean are:

-Age of Conan

-Final Fantasy XI

-Aion

 

By no zones, I mean:

-WoW

-Vanguard

-Lotro

 

Even if there are little zones like into houses or into areas like battlegrounds (or other instances), then that isn't a problem. But if every area is zoned I won't be playing.

That being said,

I'm still extremely excited for this game.

So don't think I'm a troll or something.

Don't put Vanguard in the same boat as WOW and LOTRO.

WOW/LOTRO both have zoning and instances for a start,they are not true open seamless world.

I can't go any where i want in WOW or LOTRO ,i can in Vanguard..

Look at this screen shot of Vanguard,i can go anywhere i want in it and i can cross the highest mountain or sit on top of the highest buildings,it's total open world with no instances as well.

img181.imageshack.us/img181/7559/tehatamanijd3.jpg

Originally posted by Yamota

Zoned and instanced are not the same things. Zoned, as the name suggests,simply  means that the world is seperated into different zones, with loading times between them, where as instanced means that the world creates multiple identical areas limited to X number of people and in some cases, private to you or your group.

Games can have zones (EQ, Eve) but no instances and you can have instances but not zones (WoW). Not having zones simply means that moving around the world is fluid with no noticeable entering/exiting.

Mortal Online, allegedly, will have neither zones nor instances.

Personally I dont mind zones, those can be explained in the context of the world (such as travel time or whatever) but instancing I dont completely ruins the MMORPG experience. How can you justify identical copies of the same area in the same world? Maybe in a Matrix type of game but not otherwise.

Last time i checked WOW has some zones, i can't cross from one island to another without being zoned to each island.

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by ethion

An open game isn't designed with any limits or constraints.  UO and Vanguard are examples.  I don't recall but I think AC was like this too. 

 

Yes, Asheron's Call was also an open game. You could travel all the way from one end of the world (and the world was HUGE) to the other end without seening a single loading screen, although it would take you a very long time to travel over that distance. The only times you saw loading screens was logging into or out of the game and when you used a portal.

Vanguard is the same and has a bigger world..

From the SWTOR website:

Planets are Very Large, they DO have zones, though its not stated if they are seperated by loading screens or not

Originally posted by bios5300

From the SWTOR website:

Planets are Very Large, they DO have zones, though its not stated if they are seperated by loading screens or not

To be honest, getting a loading screen when travelling from one side of the planet to other or to another planet does not bother me a bit. What I do not like if there will be lots of loading screens within a zone or the zones are too claustrophobic.

Originally posted by billynomates

Originally posted by Raltar

Yes, Asheron's Call was also an open game. You could travel all the way from one end of the world (and the world was HUGE) to the other end without seening a single loading screen, although it would take you a very long time to travel over that distance. The only times you saw loading screens was logging into or out of the game and when you used a portal.

Vanguard is the same and has a bigger world..

What is this, a contest? Fine.

Asheron's Call is a better game, wasn't class based, didn't have a crappy launch, isn't owned by Sony and wasn't developed by a drug addict. It was also here first. It probably made more money too since it was popular for years and didn't bomb after release like Vanguard did.

As for Vanguard being bigger... I'll believe that when I see it.

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by billynomates

Originally posted by Raltar

Yes, Asheron's Call was also an open game. You could travel all the way from one end of the world (and the world was HUGE) to the other end without seening a single loading screen, although it would take you a very long time to travel over that distance. The only times you saw loading screens was logging into or out of the game and when you used a portal.

Vanguard is the same and has a bigger world..

 

What is this, a contest? Fine.

Asheron's Call is a better game, wasn't class based, didn't have a crappy launch, isn't owned by Sony and wasn't developed by a drug addict. It was also here first. It probably made more money too since it was popular for years and didn't bomb after release like Vanguard did.

As for Vanguard being bigger... I'll believe that when I see it.

It was popular? I believe between the four "big" MMOs back then: DAoC, AC, EQ and UO.. it was last.
 

Originally posted by luciusETRUR

It was popular? I believe between the four "big" MMOs back then: DAoC, AC, EQ and UO.. it was last.
 

DAoC came out YEARS after EQ and AC, so you can't really compare them. The fact that AC was even still considered one of the "big four" after that many years and after that many other games were released should speak to the fact that it was an excellent game that people liked enough to still be playing it.

And besides, this isn't a contest between AC and DOaC. Its between AC and Vangaurd. How freakin popular do you have to be to beat Vanguard? As long as more than two people are online at one time you pretty much have the contest locked up.

Originally posted by Raltar

Originally posted by luciusETRUR

It was popular? I believe between the four "big" MMOs back then: DAoC, AC, EQ and UO.. it was last.
 

 

DAoC came out YEARS after EQ and AC, so you can't really compare them. The fact that AC was even still considered one of the "big four" after that many years and after that many other games were released should speak to the fact that it was an excellent game that people liked enough to still be playing it.

And besides, this isn't a contest between AC and DOaC. Its between AC and Vangaurd. How freakin popular do you have to be to beat Vanguard? As long as more than two people are online at one time you pretty much have the contest locked up.

You were saying Asheron's Call was popular, as a good point, and I'm not going to defend Vanguard's popularity since it has none. Sure, AC beats VG. I just wouldn't call it a popular MMO, most people I talk to wouldn't know what it is if I hadn't told them.
 

Originally posted by luciusETRUR

I just wouldn't call it a popular MMO, most people I talk to wouldn't know what it is if I hadn't told them.
 

"Most people" also play WoW. It doesn't make them right... or smart.