Endgame is more than just mindless PvP. It's about building cities, claiming player land, having rival player cities, socializing, and shaping the economy etc.

The PvP is so deep that it can be experienced without really PvPing. This is a totally different workd when compared to the trash in WoW & SWTOR.

No I don't agree with instanced anything. The moment you start plucking players out of the gaming world than that is the start of it not being a world. I think many years ago instancing was necessary in order to handle the large number of players in one location. Times have moved on and I think that is no longer the case.

Instancing in my view is far too restrictive and is the soul core of Theme Park gaming. In an instance everything is set the way the devs want it, true they maybe able to add a degree of variation but after doing the same instance 100 times, even these variations become the same.

The only way to have a true open world and a truely unique experience is to get rid of instances. True other players can then interfere but that adds a sense of danger and change that you simply cannot predict. In an instance, after a while, everything is predicatable.

There is also nothing stopping the devs creating really immersive and challenging open world PVE elements. If the world is vast enough and filled with enough content than there should be plenty to keep us all occupied.

A big no to instances please.

I must disagree with instances in Archeage because I wouldn't recommend Archeage for people who just want to PvE.  There are currently and in the future going to be games more enjoyable for PvE unless AA plans to have PvE servers.  Let Archeage stay true to itself instead of being everything to everyone.  IMO

Before i rage again and get warned. I just simpley say no. For all of you themepark instance lovers leave this game plenty of mmorpgs have your themepark wishes.

Originally posted by Otomox

Before i rage again and get warned. I just simpley say no. For all of you themepark instance lovers leave this game plenty of mmorpgs have your themepark wishes.

yeah, I wanna camp against 20 other people for 12 hour respawn timer monsters!   YEAH!  Just like rare spawn monsters in UO and FFXI!  Whoot!  

I mean everyone knows instancing ruins game play, it has no redeeming qualities like allowing people to experience a more personalized game play, or making it so people aren't forced to group.

...

(the following was a satire)

Originally posted by Laughing-man

Originally posted by Otomox

Before i rage again and get warned. I just simpley say no. For all of you themepark instance lovers leave this game plenty of mmorpgs have your themepark wishes.

yeah, I wanna camp against 20 other people for 12 hour respawn timer monsters!   YEAH!  Just like rare spawn monsters in UO and FFXI!  Whoot!  

I mean everyone knows instancing ruins game play, it has no redeeming qualities like allowing people to experience a more personalized game play, or making it so people aren't forced to group.

...

(the following was a satire)

Its an MMO you should have to deal with other players. Theres unlimited single player games and a ton of themepark co-op online games with a chat box for you. Instances really has no place in an MMORPG.

Instances are fail, one of the worse MMO inventions ever.

Instances like LDoN+ in EQ ruined the game, and saw even more of it in WoW, it was like what I disliked magnified, and stuff has rolled since then...I wish mmos would even do 50% open dungeons and such, all these instances kill mmos imo...It takes massive multiplayer right out of them.

Originally posted by Zekiah

Instances are fail, one of the worse MMO inventions ever.

its the future of online gaming my young friend, face it

Originally posted by wizyy

There are plenty of world bosses, and in my opinion, ArcheAge tries to be a MAINLY PvP oriented game.

If it tries to go down that road (instanced PvE), then it will never truly satisfy MMO "locusts" who will eat up the content too fast and whine about how the game isn't finished.

The "endgame" in ArcheAge is PvP - and the whole concept revolves around it - sieges, naval warfare, and even the world bosses I think.

The game tries to revive the competitivness in skill and strategy - not the competitivness in "who has the greatest purplez" - which MMORPG genre has come to after WoW.

This

Yet another 'add what I want, it wont hurt anyone else' thread. As if they have infinite resources to be everything for everyone.

OP consider if you arent closed minded yourself. Have you played any modern MMO's with public oriented PVE? Bringing up boss camping really shows you are living in the stone age of MMO's. If you gave a modern example like Rift, you'd know the greifing is on the PVE servers. There are some valid points for instanced PVE but please dont try to patronise when you are not displaying a great awareness of all the issues yourself.

finally a thread that warms my heart a little.  probably a mmorpg.com 1st.  8)

its great to see so many people speak out for an open/virtual world.   and against instancing: a.k.a. the death of MMOs.

Originally posted by corpusc

finally a thread that warms my heart a little.  probably a mmorpg.com 1st.  8)

its great to see so many people speak out for an open/virtual world.   and against instancing: a.k.a. the death of MMOs.

Instances used right or not the death of anything. The problem is just that the devs use them too much, not that they are in the game as such.

In early EQ2 there were open dungeons but with the endboss instanced so you didn´t have to wait for him to be spawned, that worked excellent. And some instanced dungeons together with some open just adds choices.

It is when you more or less instance everything with a boss in and the use phasing everywhere so you never see more than a few people things get annoying.

I don´t believe that all games needs instances and AA might do fine without it, but the technology in itself isn´t evil, it is just used the wrong way.Not everything is just black and white and a game doesn´t have to be either extremes like DDO or UO.

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by corpusc

finally a thread that warms my heart a little.  probably a mmorpg.com 1st.  8)

its great to see so many people speak out for an open/virtual world.   and against instancing: a.k.a. the death of MMOs.

Instances used right or not the death of anything. The problem is just that the devs use them too much, not that they are in the game as such.

In early EQ2 there were open dungeons but with the endboss instanced so you didn´t have to wait for him to be spawned, that worked excellent. And some instanced dungeons together with some open just adds choices.

It is when you more or less instance everything with a boss in and the use phasing everywhere so you never see more than a few people things get annoying.

I don´t believe that all games needs instances and AA might do fine without it, but the technology in itself isn´t evil, it is just used the wrong way.Not everything is just black and white and a game doesn´t have to be either extremes like DDO or UO.

i'm designing a game.  it has some use of instancing.  so i'm only %98 against them.

instances as we know them ARE the death of MMOs.  whether that matters to you or not varies.

the only acceptable ways i've seen them used so far is Asherons Call 2  (the Vaults, which sound like the exact same thing you mentioned from EQ2), and the ***** PUBLIC ****** instances of Champions Online, which does not kill the world (making it private) but is only used as a bandwidth relief valve.

any other use i've seen (none do them how i plan to) kills the massively in MMOs.

Originally posted by corpusc

i'm designing a game.  it has some use of instancing.  so i'm only %98 against them.

instances as we know them ARE the death of MMOs.  whether that matters to you or not varies.

the only acceptable ways i've seen them used so far is Asherons Call 2  (the Vaults, which sound like the exact same thing you mentioned from EQ2), and the ***** PUBLIC ****** instances of Champions Online, which does not kill the world (making it private) but is only used as a bandwidth relief valve.

any other use i've seen (none do them how i plan to) kills the massively in MMOs.

Well, as I said, it is really the number that matters.

5 instanced dungeons and 15 open in a game hardly kills it, I prefer open dungeons myself but certain hours they just gets overfilled with players and massive might be good but when there is more players than mobs in a dungeon it gets pretty annoying. If you have a few instanced you don´t have to use phasing to keep the number of players down in all the dungeons.

Some games also instance the first few levels you play so you learn the ropes, that works really well in most games particularly PvP games since it sucks to get killed before you figured out how the game controls even works.

Most of the game should happen in open zones, PvE or PvP, there I agree but as long as you just have a few instances it does not destroy the feeling of playing a massive game, at least not to me.

Originally posted by Benjola

First time I saw instanced dungeons was in Everquest in 2000 somethin`, can't remember exactly when it was or if EQ was first MMO to introduce them but I never really liked instancing of any kind.

It just goes against everything a MMORPG stands for, or at least what it stood for in late 90's early 2000`s and what I think it should stand for.

IMO instancing was the first step towards screwing up the genre and then the disaster called WoW came along heh.

 

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by corpusc

i'm designing a game.  it has some use of instancing.  so i'm only %98 against them.

instances as we know them ARE the death of MMOs.  whether that matters to you or not varies.

the only acceptable ways i've seen them used so far is Asherons Call 2  (the Vaults, which sound like the exact same thing you mentioned from EQ2), and the ***** PUBLIC ****** instances of Champions Online, which does not kill the world (making it private) but is only used as a bandwidth relief valve.

any other use i've seen (none do them how i plan to) kills the massively in MMOs.

Well, as I said, it is really the number that matters.

5 instanced dungeons and 15 open in a game hardly kills it, I prefer open dungeons myself but certain hours they just gets overfilled with players and massive might be good but when there is more players than mobs in a dungeon it gets pretty annoying. If you have a few instanced you don´t have to use phasing to keep the number of players down in all the dungeons.

Some games also instance the first few levels you play so you learn the ropes, that works really well in most games particularly PvP games since it sucks to get killed before you figured out how the game controls even works.

Most of the game should happen in open zones, PvE or PvP, there I agree but as long as you just have a few instances it does not destroy the feeling of playing a massive game, at least not to me.

it might not kill it for the rest of the world, but it kills it for those 5 dungeons.  and rather than being private, they should be public instances  IMO.  where CO could have improved on their setup is giving people a setting where they can choose from at least 3 options (if not more).   light, medium & heavy population.   at one time i even thought people should be given the option for ANY zone or dungeon to be totally private for players who choose.  and i might even try it, but if it sapped away too many people from the public world, i'd take away the option.  but they could still choose a Light Population setting.  also by having those settings you would not get an immersion weakening instance selection screen,   and that could all apply to ALL dungeons/regions, so people would never have that problem of there being "too many" players.

i think starter levels and tutorials is an acceptable use.  i forgot i'd experienced that in LOTRO.  but LOTRO overdid it by keeping you away from the living world for like 6 levels or so.  should be 1 or 2 levels at most IMO.

Originally posted by corpusc

it might not kill it for the rest of the world, but it kills it for those 5 dungeons.  and rather than being private, they should be public instances  IMO.  where CO could have improved on their setup is giving people a setting where they can choose from at least 3 options (if not more).   light, medium & heavy population.   at one time i even thought people should be given the option for ANY zone or dungeon to be totally private for players who choose.  and i might even try it, but if it sapped away too many people from the public world, i'd take away the option.  but they could still choose a Light Population setting.  also by having those settings you would not get an immersion weakening instance selection screen,   and that could all apply to ALL dungeons/regions, so people would never have that problem of there being "too many" players.

i think starter levels and tutorials is an acceptable use.  i forgot i'd experienced that in LOTRO.  but LOTRO overdid it by keeping you away from the living world for like 6 levels or so.  should be 1 or 2 levels at most IMO.

Can´t say I played CO but it might work as well, yes.

And yeah, it don´t have to take hours or anything but it is nice to figure out the basic by yourself at least so you don´t look pathetic as soon as you enter the game. Some game allows you to skip the area directly if you so wish and that is probably the best so you can stay 1-5 levels, that means everyone gets the time they need but noone is forced to stay in a boring tutorial longer than they must.

Originally posted by corpusc

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by corpusc

i'm designing a game.  it has some use of instancing.  so i'm only %98 against them.

instances as we know them ARE the death of MMOs.  whether that matters to you or not varies.

the only acceptable ways i've seen them used so far is Asherons Call 2  (the Vaults, which sound like the exact same thing you mentioned from EQ2), and the ***** PUBLIC ****** instances of Champions Online, which does not kill the world (making it private) but is only used as a bandwidth relief valve.

any other use i've seen (none do them how i plan to) kills the massively in MMOs.

Well, as I said, it is really the number that matters.

5 instanced dungeons and 15 open in a game hardly kills it, I prefer open dungeons myself but certain hours they just gets overfilled with players and massive might be good but when there is more players than mobs in a dungeon it gets pretty annoying. If you have a few instanced you don´t have to use phasing to keep the number of players down in all the dungeons.

Some games also instance the first few levels you play so you learn the ropes, that works really well in most games particularly PvP games since it sucks to get killed before you figured out how the game controls even works.

Most of the game should happen in open zones, PvE or PvP, there I agree but as long as you just have a few instances it does not destroy the feeling of playing a massive game, at least not to me.

 

 

i think starter levels and tutorials is an acceptable use.  i forgot i'd experienced that in LOTRO.  but LOTRO overdid it by keeping you away from the living world for like 6 levels or so.  should be 1 or 2 levels at most IMO.

 

LOTRO didn't over do it at all.You do realize that the start of the game is your part of the story  but everyone who is below level six and playing the same race is in the instance with you.

Using LOTRO is a bad example because it's nothing like what the OP is talking about.