Originally posted by IPolygon

Originally posted by deziwright

this game isnt open world at all. i dont think they say it is. SURE it HAS WvWvW combat but thats the largest non loading zone ive seen in beta.

this games a lobby game.

just like GW1.

I hate to quote myself, but

ZONING != INSTANCING

or

ZONING IS NOT EQUAL TO INSTANCING

if you cannot read the syntax above.

True, but its all about perception: frequent loading screens + zipping around with fast travel are able to make a game world feel like it isn't "whole" and detract from the open, persistent feeling it should have, and when those loading screens end up being too long there's a whole new can of immersion breaking worms to deal with. It doesn't really matter whether you call it instanced, sharded or zoned: it all comes down on the average player's experience of that world.

In that sense the topic title should have been:

"A few points of concern: The open world and how it might not feel so very open afterall".

p.s. that PVP hub which you can go to before you enter the mists still has the exact same lobby function from GW1 towns, despite its portals leading to persitent zones. Same with the cities with all their portals to other capitals. There's still a distinct lobbyness to GW2, despite the zoned, persistent main game world.

Originally posted by DarkPony

Originally posted by IPolygon

Originally posted by deziwright

this game isnt open world at all. i dont think they say it is. SURE it HAS WvWvW combat but thats the largest non loading zone ive seen in beta.

this games a lobby game.

just like GW1.

I hate to quote myself, but

ZONING != INSTANCING

or

ZONING IS NOT EQUAL TO INSTANCING

if you cannot read the syntax above.

True, but its all about perception: frequent loading screens + zipping around with fast travel are able to make a game world feel like it isn't "whole" and detract from the open, persistent feeling it should have, and when those loading screens end up being too long there's a whole new can of immersion breaking worms to deal with. It doesn't really matter whether you call it instanced, sharded or zoned: it all comes down on the average player's experience of that world.

In that sense the topic title should have been:

"A few points of concern: The open world and how it might not feel so very open afterall".

p.s. that PVP hub which you can go to before you enter the mists still has the exact same lobby function from GW1 towns, despite its portals leading to persitent zones. Same with the cities with all their portals to other capitals. There's still a distinct lobbyness to GW2, despite the zoned, persistent main game world.

 

 

This is the exact reason (sorry Pony to bring up dead horses, hopefully no one you knew) what I prefer mounts to instant travel. Teleporting all over is the quickest way to make a game world feel lobbied. Mounts help you travel quickly while at the same time, you are still moving through the world. But this, I suppose, is not really the thread to start beating that horse again.

Originally posted by DarkPony

True, but its all about perception: frequent loading screens + zipping around with fast travel are able to make a game world feel like it isn't "whole" and detract from the open, persistent feeling it should have, and when those loading screens end up being too long there's a whole new can of immersion breaking worms to deal with. It doesn't really matter whether you call it instanced, sharded or zoned: it all comes down on the average player's experience of that world.

In that sense the topic title should have been:

"A few points of concern: The open world and how it might not feel so very open afterall".

p.s. that PVP hub which you can go to before you enter the mists still has the exact same lobby function from GW1 towns, despite its portals leading to persitent zones. Same with the cities with all their portals to other capitals. There's still a distinct lobbyness to GW2, despite the zoned, persistent main game world.

  

Out of curiosity, did you play GW1 at all? Map travel is a part of GW lore... having it won't break the open world feeling, it'll actually enhance it. How, you may ask? Simple... it will greatly reduce the number of times you actually see a portal between zones. You'll pass through a portal into a new zone, tag a waypoint, and from then on you have a fast travel point in that zone. Odds are that you'll rarely ever pass through the portal again. Fast travel in GW feels natural, as it will in GW2. You'll get to a waypoint quickly, then you'll very soon be caught up in the huge, open world zones which will immediately put "how you got there" out of mind (especially once it's comfortably familiar).

Also, as far as we know to date, only the five capital cities are zoned. This implies, and I could be wrong, that the capitals are intended to be the major hubs of the game. There will be other towns and outposts to be sure (we can't forget to add Lion's Arch to the list, apologies... six major cities), but it seems on the surface that your major NPC resource centers will be limited, which integrates nicely with map travel. There's no need to have NPCs for everything in every town or outpost.

The Mist area is intended to have a lobbyesque feel to it. It's where PvP folks can hang out prior to entering competitive matches. This is by design. However, I disagree that the portals between the capitals gives those cities a lobby feeling completely. They're convenient, allowing people to get together quickly at low levels to play together, and they'll also add to the RP aspect for many being that the gates are also a major part of lore. Even in the books, travelling from major city to major city via the gates is mentioned and not insignificantly.

In GW2, map travel and Asura gates feel natural, like they belong (which they do). They don't detract from the open world at all... the open world stands on it's own merits when you're out there involded.

There is not loading between every zone in Guild Wars 2.

you have loading screens between regions(clusters of zones) and for cities. 

Originally posted by sonoggi
Who cares? You're doing de's in one area for a long while, so why would you keep teleporting around? The game was designed in a way that you end up exploring one area in depth, maybe spending many hours in it.

And gw2 was never advertised as a super open sandbox. Perhaps you should re-evaluate your expectations before getting your heart broken the second time.

Minor correction to the post...

whats his computer spec anyway?

Originally posted by Fir3line
@Volkon, zones have portals to transition, like i spent 8 hours in Queensdale, 1st human zone, and then to go to the 15+ zone had to go thro a portal, pretty much agree with everything else you said, just correcting on this

Yes, I agree with that. What I'm saying, though, is that once you were in the the 15+ zone did you go through the portal again or simply map travel there and back. Did that have any affect on your impressions of a huge, open world?

Originally posted by Volkon

Originally posted by Fir3line
@Volkon, zones have portals to transition, like i spent 8 hours in Queensdale, 1st human zone, and then to go to the 15+ zone had to go thro a portal, pretty much agree with everything else you said, just correcting on this

Yes, I agree with that. What I'm saying, though, is that once you were in the the 15+ zone did you go through the portal again or simply map travel there and back. Did that have any affect on your impressions of a huge, open world?

I walked back because it was cheaper and I was getting owned just at the entrance of the zone since I was much lower lvl. But ye, I'd agree I would have used map travel to go everywhere

Originally posted by DarkPony

Originally posted by Vaultar

Originally posted by DarkPony
*epic multicolored snipage*

Aye, I guess we are pretty much on the same wavelength. And an instant travel system without loading screens is pretty much impossible (unless they restrict fast-traveling to only IN-zone fast traveling in which case a good preloading system could take care of it. But yeah, fast traveling between seperate zones will always mean loading screens, (at least with the tech of our day and age). 

The idea of having a dedicated non-fast travel server (i.e. a "hard core rp" server) and more natural means of transport would have me signing up right away I guess. The world is looking so great that I'd gladly spent (a reasonable amount of) extra time getting to places instead of having ma immershunz chopped to pieces.

...

 Just out of curiosity, why do you consider instant travel so immersion shattering?  "Teleportation" is fairly common in the fantasy genre, so I don't really see why it should make the game less immersive.  In fact, even one of the most immersive MMORPGs, UO, had instant travel.  And it probably had the MOST instant travel of an MMO I have played.

Anyway, I guess my point is that if you don't like instant travel, it's just a point of preference.  I don't think a game with instant travel is any less immersive than one without instant travel.

Originally posted by Volkon

*snipage*

Out of curiosity, did you play GW1 at all?

Yex. Two or so months at launch, I did. A long, long time ago. (The lobbyness was one of my reasons to quit. Actually I picked up vanilla WOW for the first time right after playing GW1 and its open, seamless world completely blew me away).

Map travel is a part of GW lore... having it won't break the open world feeling, it'll actually enhance it. How, you may ask? Simple... it will greatly reduce the number of times you actually see a portal between zones. You'll pass through a portal into a new zone, tag a waypoint, and from then on you have a fast travel point in that zone. Odds are that you'll rarely ever pass through the portal again.

Fast travel in GW feels natural, as it will in GW2. You'll get to a waypoint quickly, then you'll very soon be caught up in the huge, open world zones which will immediately put "how you got there" out of mind (especially once it's comfortably familiar).

Whether fast travel leads to more or less teleporting is debatable I suppose. If zones are big and have a lot of content you'll end up zip-zapping around the map in a thorough session. That amounts to a lot of loading screens. And having loading screens between zones isn't the other end of the spectrum; it's another impact to the open feeling of a gameworld. I'd rather have neither, of course.

I've heared it before but personally I don't buy the "teleporting is an essential part of the IP" idea, myself. They did away with a personally instanced gameworld as well; a huge break from the format of GW1. Problem is in my eyes, and this is the crucial bit: they didn't went all the way with making GW2 truly "open" by still clinging to teleporting, portals between zones (instead of hidden preloading) and no natural means of transportation (i.e. mounts and/or whichever kind of taxi service).

It wouldn't have been so hard to come with lore justifications for the Asura Gates and the entire teleporting system breaking down; maybe a dragon pooped on it :P They've shown some remarkable creativity in the lore department to justify servers meeting in the Mists and enemy races fighting together against their own racial brethren from another dimension too.

The one single reason (in my mind) why they decided to still cling to teleporting is that player convenience (i.e. instant gratification) is one of the Guildwars franchise's biggest USP's. And yeah, this comes at the cost of immersion for the likes of me.

Also, as far as we know to date, only the five capital cities are zoned. This implies, and I could be wrong, that the capitals are intended to be the major hubs of the game. There will be other towns and outposts to be sure (we can't forget to add Lion's Arch to the list, apologies... six major cities), but it seems on the surface that your major NPC resource centers will be limited, which integrates nicely with map travel. There's no need to have NPCs for everything in every town or outpost.

 

The Mist area is intended to have a lobbyesque feel to it. It's where PvP folks can hang out prior to entering competitive matches. This is by design. However, I disagree that the portals between the capitals gives those cities a lobby feeling completely. They're convenient, allowing people to get together quickly at low levels to play together, and they'll also add to the RP aspect for many being that the gates are also a major part of lore. Even in the books, travelling from major city to major city via the gates is mentioned and not insignificantly.

 

In GW2, map travel and Asura gates feel natural, like they belong (which they do). They don't detract from the open world at all... the open world stands on it's own merits when you're out there involded.

The last bit is what I don't agree on, I explained that already. But I can accept that there are people NOT having a problem with it though, as like any aspect of a mmorpg it's depending on personal preferences for a great deal. Still I am very curious how the average player will experience this at launch. Will it still feel as a "whole" world, or will it feel sharded and broken up by loading screens? We shall seeeth, I suppose.

I love the idea of fast travel.

I like that the game is a persistent world that is mostly open. (unilke GW1)

I feel like it is nearly impossible not to have load screens for personal story instances.

I can accept that there is a load screen between major zone clumps and inner city hubs.

Originally posted by colddog04

I love the idea of fast travel.

I like that the game is a persistent world that is mostly open. (unilke GW1)

I feel like it is nearly impossible not to have load screens for personal story instances.

I can accept that there is a load screen between major zone clumps and inner city hubs.

 I'm with you...I just don't think this is that big of a deal.  I know it's my opinion, but well...that's what it is.

IMO, having too much instancing is a HUGE problem...but having a loading screen every now and then isn't a big deal at all unless its too excessive.  I mean in EQ, you had TONS of loading screens and EQ is generally regarded as an immersive game.

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by colddog04

I love the idea of fast travel.

I like that the game is a persistent world that is mostly open. (unilke GW1)

I feel like it is nearly impossible not to have load screens for personal story instances.

I can accept that there is a load screen between major zone clumps and inner city hubs.

 I'm with you...I just don't think this is that big of a deal.  I know it's my opinion, but well...that's what it is.

IMO, having too much instancing is a HUGE problem...but having a loading screen every now and then isn't a big deal at all unless its too excessive.  I mean in EQ, you had TONS of loading screens and EQ is generally regarded as an immersive game.

Here's the difference and the problem.

In UO, you had to actually work to be able to fast-travel. Not only did you have to discover the locations but you determined where to mark, not the game. You also needed to have reagents, runes, and enough skill to mark the runes. In Guild Wars, you just open the map and PRESTO! There is a difference and although it might be considered a small difference by some, it's the difference between immersion and not. For me, clicking map hubs in Guild Wars breaks immersion.

Too many loading screens suck too as they also break immersion. If you have too many they become similar to commercials breaking up your TV show or movie. AoC is a good example of what NOT to do.

These may seem like nothing to you but for many gamers these are serious immersive issues/problems.

Originally posted by Zekiah

Here's the difference and the problem.

In UO, you had to actually work to be able to fast-travel. Not only did you have to discover the locations but you determined where to mark, not the game. You also needed to have reagents, runes, and enough skill to mark the runes. In Guild Wars, you just open the map and PRESTO! There is a difference and although it might be considered a small difference by some, it's the difference between immersion and not. For me, clicking map hubs in Guild Wars breaks immersion.

Too many loading screens suck too as they also break immersion. If you have too many they become similar to commercials breaking up your TV show or movie. AoC is a good example of what NOT to do.

These may seem like nothing to you but for many gamers these are serious immersive issues/problems.

Although keep in mind this kind of map travel is ingrained in the GW2 lore, making it more immersive for it to be present. How immersive, you may ask? When you're looking at your map in GW2 other players looking at you will see you looking at a map that you're holding.

** Wouldn't that be quite the April Fool's joke for next year... every time you open your map it starts singing the map song from Dora the Explorer...

Originally posted by Zekiah

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by colddog04

I love the idea of fast travel.

I like that the game is a persistent world that is mostly open. (unilke GW1)

I feel like it is nearly impossible not to have load screens for personal story instances.

I can accept that there is a load screen between major zone clumps and inner city hubs.

 I'm with you...I just don't think this is that big of a deal.  I know it's my opinion, but well...that's what it is.

IMO, having too much instancing is a HUGE problem...but having a loading screen every now and then isn't a big deal at all unless its too excessive.  I mean in EQ, you had TONS of loading screens and EQ is generally regarded as an immersive game.

Here's the difference and the problem.

In UO, you had to actually work to be able to fast-travel. Not only did you have to discover the locations but you determined where to mark, not the game. You also needed to have reagents, runes, and enough skill to mark the runes. In Guild Wars, you just open the map and PRESTO! There is a difference and although it might be considered a small difference by some, it's the difference between immersion and not. For me, clicking map hubs in Guild Wars breaks immersion.

Too many loading screens suck too as they also break immersion. If you have too many they become similar to commercials breaking up your TV show or movie. AoC is a good example of what NOT to do.

These may seem like nothing to you but for many gamers these are serious immersive issues/problems.

 That's not how I remember it :)!

In UO, you went to a local player vendor that sold runes to popular places.  You bought the runes for a reasonable price.  You could then fast travel to any of those places without ever having to discover them and make copies of your runes just in case you died.

In GW2, at least you have to actually go to the location first ;).  And as for reagents?  Big deal...if you were a mage, getting reagents was normal for you.  You just bought them from a vendor.  It was only difficult to do this when you were first starting out.

Loading screens...sure okay.  But it really is a question of degrees.  If you are getting a loading screen like every 5 minutes, that's terrible.  But if you only get a loading screen like every 4 hours...I wouldn't really care.  It's just too infrequent.  I can't say for certain how many loading screens there will be in GW2...but I don't think they will be all that frequent.

And as for AoC...I don't really remember that many loading screens.  If I recall correctly...you basically went to a zone (loading screen), stayed in the zone for a long time doing quests or whatever, and then eventually left the zone (loading screen).

I dunno, maybe I'm just used to loading screens from older games so I accept them as normal.

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by Zekiah

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by colddog04

I love the idea of fast travel.

I like that the game is a persistent world that is mostly open. (unilke GW1)

I feel like it is nearly impossible not to have load screens for personal story instances.

I can accept that there is a load screen between major zone clumps and inner city hubs.

 I'm with you...I just don't think this is that big of a deal.  I know it's my opinion, but well...that's what it is.

IMO, having too much instancing is a HUGE problem...but having a loading screen every now and then isn't a big deal at all unless its too excessive.  I mean in EQ, you had TONS of loading screens and EQ is generally regarded as an immersive game.

Here's the difference and the problem.

In UO, you had to actually work to be able to fast-travel. Not only did you have to discover the locations but you determined where to mark, not the game. You also needed to have reagents, runes, and enough skill to mark the runes. In Guild Wars, you just open the map and PRESTO! There is a difference and although it might be considered a small difference by some, it's the difference between immersion and not. For me, clicking map hubs in Guild Wars breaks immersion.

Too many loading screens suck too as they also break immersion. If you have too many they become similar to commercials breaking up your TV show or movie. AoC is a good example of what NOT to do.

These may seem like nothing to you but for many gamers these are serious immersive issues/problems.

 That's not how I remember it :)!

In UO, you went to a local player vendor that sold runes to popular places.  You bought the runes for a reasonable price.  You could then fast travel to any of those places without ever having to discover them and make copies of your runes just in case you died.

Yes, you could buy them but I always remarked somewhere else. Once again, there IS a difference, that being work.

In GW2, at least you have to actually go to the location first ;).  And as for reagents?  Big deal...if you were a mage, getting reagents was normal for you.  You just bought them from a vendor.  It was only difficult to do this when you were first starting out.

Like I said, it might not be a big deal to you but for many gamers out there it is. Fast travel in Guild Wars is cheesy at best. In UO, someone had to do the work, including finding and buying the marked runes if you so choose. There IS a difference.

Loading screens...sure okay.  But it really is a question of degrees.  If you are getting a loading screen like every 5 minutes, that's terrible.  But if you only get a loading screen like every 4 hours...I wouldn't really care.  It's just too infrequent.  I can't say for certain how many loading screens there will be in GW2...but I don't think they will be all that frequent.

I would agree. I don't mind an occasional loading screen say at start-up but there's a point where it becomes really intrusive. I imagine there will be pretty much the same number of loading screens in GW2 but we'll see.

And as for AoC...I don't really remember that many loading screens.  If I recall correctly...you basically went to a zone (loading screen), stayed in the zone for a long time doing quests or whatever, and then eventually left the zone (loading screen).

Zoning, loading screens...it doesn't matter, the point is they break immersion. AoC was the absolute WORST I've seen for that, just horrible and one of the reasons I quit.

I dunno, maybe I'm just used to loading screens from older games so I accept them as normal.

It's all about personal opinions but there are game mechanics I detest and GW fast travel along with too much zoning or too many loading screens are among them. It makes it difficult to feel like you're actually in the game world when you have these many breaks to the action/game.

I'm hoping ArcheAge will keep these to a minimum because most MMOs out there and on the horizon have these horrid game mechanics.

Originally posted by Zekiah

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by Zekiah

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by colddog04

I love the idea of fast travel.

I like that the game is a persistent world that is mostly open. (unilke GW1)

I feel like it is nearly impossible not to have load screens for personal story instances.

I can accept that there is a load screen between major zone clumps and inner city hubs.

 I'm with you...I just don't think this is that big of a deal.  I know it's my opinion, but well...that's what it is.

IMO, having too much instancing is a HUGE problem...but having a loading screen every now and then isn't a big deal at all unless its too excessive.  I mean in EQ, you had TONS of loading screens and EQ is generally regarded as an immersive game.

Here's the difference and the problem.

In UO, you had to actually work to be able to fast-travel. Not only did you have to discover the locations but you determined where to mark, not the game. You also needed to have reagents, runes, and enough skill to mark the runes. In Guild Wars, you just open the map and PRESTO! There is a difference and although it might be considered a small difference by some, it's the difference between immersion and not. For me, clicking map hubs in Guild Wars breaks immersion.

Too many loading screens suck too as they also break immersion. If you have too many they become similar to commercials breaking up your TV show or movie. AoC is a good example of what NOT to do.

These may seem like nothing to you but for many gamers these are serious immersive issues/problems.

 That's not how I remember it :)!

In UO, you went to a local player vendor that sold runes to popular places.  You bought the runes for a reasonable price.  You could then fast travel to any of those places without ever having to discover them and make copies of your runes just in case you died.

Yes, you could buy them but I always remarked somewhere else. Once again, there IS a difference, that being work.

In GW2, at least you have to actually go to the location first ;).  And as for reagents?  Big deal...if you were a mage, getting reagents was normal for you.  You just bought them from a vendor.  It was only difficult to do this when you were first starting out.

Like I said, it might not be a big deal to you but for many gamers out there it is. Fast travel in Guild Wars is cheesy at best. In UO, someone had to do the work, including finding and buying the marked runes if you so choose. There IS a difference.

Loading screens...sure okay.  But it really is a question of degrees.  If you are getting a loading screen like every 5 minutes, that's terrible.  But if you only get a loading screen like every 4 hours...I wouldn't really care.  It's just too infrequent.  I can't say for certain how many loading screens there will be in GW2...but I don't think they will be all that frequent.

I would agree. I don't mind an occasional loading screen say at start-up but there's a point where it becomes really intrusive. I imagine there will be pretty much the same number of loading screens in GW2 but we'll see.

And as for AoC...I don't really remember that many loading screens.  If I recall correctly...you basically went to a zone (loading screen), stayed in the zone for a long time doing quests or whatever, and then eventually left the zone (loading screen).

Zoning, loading screens...it doesn't matter, the point is they break immersion. AoC was the absolute WORST I've seen for that, just horrible and one of the reasons I quit.

I dunno, maybe I'm just used to loading screens from older games so I accept them as normal.

It's all about personal opinions but there are game mechanics I detest and GW fast travel along with too much zoning or too many loading screens are among them. It makes it difficult to feel like you're actually in the game world when you have these many breaks to the action/game.

I'm hoping ArcheAge will keep these to a minimum because most MMOs out there and on the horizon have these horrid game mechanics.

I guess i will never get it.  In who's game world are you trying to immerse yourself in. because if its not the world created by the people making the game then i think your doing it wrong.  if its written in the lore extensively and a main stape of the world they created how can it be immersion breaking?

Can it be something you dont like about the game, yes.  something you hate about all games, yes.  but i dont get how it can break immersion

Originally posted by st4t1ck

Originally posted by Zekiah

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by Zekiah

Originally posted by Creslin321

Originally posted by colddog04

I love the idea of fast travel.

I like that the game is a persistent world that is mostly open. (unilke GW1)

I feel like it is nearly impossible not to have load screens for personal story instances.

I can accept that there is a load screen between major zone clumps and inner city hubs.

 I'm with you...I just don't think this is that big of a deal.  I know it's my opinion, but well...that's what it is.

IMO, having too much instancing is a HUGE problem...but having a loading screen every now and then isn't a big deal at all unless its too excessive.  I mean in EQ, you had TONS of loading screens and EQ is generally regarded as an immersive game.

Here's the difference and the problem.

In UO, you had to actually work to be able to fast-travel. Not only did you have to discover the locations but you determined where to mark, not the game. You also needed to have reagents, runes, and enough skill to mark the runes. In Guild Wars, you just open the map and PRESTO! There is a difference and although it might be considered a small difference by some, it's the difference between immersion and not. For me, clicking map hubs in Guild Wars breaks immersion.

Too many loading screens suck too as they also break immersion. If you have too many they become similar to commercials breaking up your TV show or movie. AoC is a good example of what NOT to do.

These may seem like nothing to you but for many gamers these are serious immersive issues/problems.

 That's not how I remember it :)!

In UO, you went to a local player vendor that sold runes to popular places.  You bought the runes for a reasonable price.  You could then fast travel to any of those places without ever having to discover them and make copies of your runes just in case you died.

Yes, you could buy them but I always remarked somewhere else. Once again, there IS a difference, that being work.

In GW2, at least you have to actually go to the location first ;).  And as for reagents?  Big deal...if you were a mage, getting reagents was normal for you.  You just bought them from a vendor.  It was only difficult to do this when you were first starting out.

Like I said, it might not be a big deal to you but for many gamers out there it is. Fast travel in Guild Wars is cheesy at best. In UO, someone had to do the work, including finding and buying the marked runes if you so choose. There IS a difference.

Loading screens...sure okay.  But it really is a question of degrees.  If you are getting a loading screen like every 5 minutes, that's terrible.  But if you only get a loading screen like every 4 hours...I wouldn't really care.  It's just too infrequent.  I can't say for certain how many loading screens there will be in GW2...but I don't think they will be all that frequent.

I would agree. I don't mind an occasional loading screen say at start-up but there's a point where it becomes really intrusive. I imagine there will be pretty much the same number of loading screens in GW2 but we'll see.

And as for AoC...I don't really remember that many loading screens.  If I recall correctly...you basically went to a zone (loading screen), stayed in the zone for a long time doing quests or whatever, and then eventually left the zone (loading screen).

Zoning, loading screens...it doesn't matter, the point is they break immersion. AoC was the absolute WORST I've seen for that, just horrible and one of the reasons I quit.

I dunno, maybe I'm just used to loading screens from older games so I accept them as normal.

It's all about personal opinions but there are game mechanics I detest and GW fast travel along with too much zoning or too many loading screens are among them. It makes it difficult to feel like you're actually in the game world when you have these many breaks to the action/game.

I'm hoping ArcheAge will keep these to a minimum because most MMOs out there and on the horizon have these horrid game mechanics.

I guess i will never get it.  In who's game world are you trying to immerse yourself in. because if its not the world created by the people making the game then i think your doing it wrong.  if its written in the lore extensively and a main stape of the world they created how can it be immersion breaking?

Can it be something you dont like about the game, yes.  something you hate about all games, yes.  but i dont get how it can break immersion

And some gamers never will because those days have been lost. No longer are we free to roam open worlds full of possibility and exploration. No longer do we FEEL like we're living in the world, like we're living the life of our character. No, now it's all about fast l00tz, linear quest hubs that force you to play how they want you to play. The days of freedom are gone.

Most people who grew up on UO and/or SWG know what I'm talking about.