Originally posted by ninja33284
....

Swearing does not make you any more right or wrong... it just makes you look stupid TBH.

You need to do a lot of work on your maths and assumptions too.

Originally posted by Gyrus

Originally posted by ninja33284
....

Swearing does not make you any more right or wrong... it just makes you look stupid TBH.

 

You need to do a lot of work on your maths and assumptions too.

 

 

sure is knows how to read Notes... your pro dude see the "this is a quick reference" and the "heyy i know 2 million people in 1 server is prolyl never gonna happen noteS" you my friend are a pro-reader GG

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

"MMO's are about many players sharing a world, and not meant to be about isolated segregated experiences."

There are no lockable doors in a "shared world"?

Your logic is completely without merit.

This thread (and your recent posts in others on the same topic) is nothing more than you attempting to aggrandize your preferred playstyle by using flawed logic to "prove" that all other playstyles are invalid.

You have not succeeded.

 

Instancing has nothing to do with playstyle.  It's merely a gameplay limitation.

Originally posted by Quirhid

Originally posted by jackeccs

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by jackeccs

Ok, so anyone saying anything about waiting hours for people to complete a dungeon is dumb. True, 90% of MMO's are that shallow to only have a single dungeon for a certain level range. But, a smart MMO would have a lot of dungeons for all level ranges. Not just a single one where everyone has to wait and get camped.

Instances are noob. A real MMO has a large world and is seamless. Before anyone starts to say anything about ohh dur what about a small world with lots of detail. Well, this is where it comes down to having a company with enough money to make something unique that works, than a lot of companies making the same damn thing that fails every time.

 

 

Stupid rant with no idea of how expensive content is. Even the richest company would not afford to build so many dungeons. There are a few THOUSAND people on each shard of a standard MMO at any time. Do you think they can build HUNDREDS of dungeons? You are dreaming. Not even blizzard can afford that.

 

Then don't go into the market. How many game companies wished they wouldn't have? Blizzard could easily do that, if there's any stupid rant it's what you just said there. Look how many games their working on, and how many people they have on their teams. They could easily make a game with hundreds of dungeons. So tell me, aside from the salary every employee gets anyway, how much extra does content cost? It's whether the content is junk or not.

 

I will not get into a discussion about software engineering with a guy who uses the word "noob". You have strong opinions about this and you've clearly made up your mind.

World design has nothing to do with software engineering.  You seem to make the assumption that all dungeons for most games are designed by hand like a half-life 2 map using brushes and reshaping them, carving them, etc.  Having a tool that allows them to be created from components speeds up development time a lot.  Asheron's Call has 857 dungeons (that players have found), so why can't a game that brings in 165 million dollars a month make more than that?

Originally posted by Pcgamer81

i disgree with OP. i think instances are good thing. heres examples. in WoW it's bad enough putting up with players camping or teaming same mobs yours is. but popular instances like say Deadmines would suk if other teams kept coming thru clearing things. now look at city of heroes the instances keep you alone keeping the hero and villian feel. sometimes instances are there to keep the fun up you don't like oh well theres those like me who want time away from those not in my group ot just need time alone. should instances be offline not at all not one bit. i pay to play mmo and i like to have instance option live with it.

I think you missed the op's point, why pay a monthly fee to play alone?  A singleplayer game should be fundamentally different in terms of game mechanics from an MMORPG.

I think instancing and phasing can be amazing if done well. It can explain stories, let you in the skin of a powerful character...you know, it's a MMORPG, not just a MMO. Of course, most zones should not be instanced, but instancing can be great if used properly.

Originally posted by Thenarius

I think instancing and phasing can be amazing if done well. It can explain stories, let you in the skin of a powerful character...you know, it's a MMORPG, not just a MMO. Of course, most zones should not be instanced, but instancing can be great if used properly.

Yeah that's great if you're playing a singleplayer RPG, but you need something that fits in the context of the game world, and everyone experiencing the same story at different points in time makes absolutely no sense and completely ruins any sense of immersion.  If you're going to learn about an evil character, you should do so by seeing the mark he left on the world, or seeing him romping around destroying towns.

Originally posted by pencilrick

If your gameplay is "instanced" or separated from the community by "phasing", you might as well be playing offline.  And if you are with a group, then okay, the group might as well be playing offline, maybe at a LAN party at someone's house. [Suppose that these players are playing from different parts of the world. What do you propose then? Would you still consider that offline?]

MMO's are about many players sharing a world, and not meant to be about isolated segregated experiences.  The player who brags about having spent 10,000 gold on his instanced housing makes no more sense than someone bragging that they have an offline castle [Agreed].  If you cannot see it, it does not exist (in the gameworld).  The player who goes into and comes out from an instanced dungeon, might as well have been logged off the whole time, as far as the community knows or cares [Given, but what's the point in this statement?].  The player who "phases" into some solo quest against an 80 Elite mob and uses some gimme item that is part of the quest chain and which zaps the creature into a non-elite mob that is easily defeated, has no more bragging rights than if he had been offline [Agreed].

If it didn't happen in the greater shared gameworld, it didn't happen. 

"Instancing", "phasing", "linear story quests" and such all serve to isolate the player from the community and reduce the call load of customer service, since minimized player contact equates with minimized number of player complaints.  And I really think these "instancing" game design methods are more about the latter.  The whole "instancing" movement is really equivalent to sedating an entire psychiatric ward so the patients will all shut up and go to sleep. [Well put, but it is not to say that instancing isn't reasonable in some areas. Without instancing, you could imagine the Hellish grief folks would take on dealing with others running through and downing a boss before they can get there because they're a ways back dealing with the mob that the other group gets to skip. While I understand some of what you are saying, we both know that instancing is the unfortunate biproduct of assanign griefers within the community exploiting what they can when they can. That, and it helps to dilute much of the lag that would be shared otherwise.]

"Instancing" and its forms have no place in great MMO's.  PERIOD.

While I wish we could have as in-depth game play as possible, instancing offers many variables that SHOULD be considered by great MMOs if they wish to truly produce large scale content and keep the "call load of customer service" reduced. I agree that it makes the immersion of dungeon scenarios, etcetera a little less tangible, but I don't personally feel that it's by much.

I feel compelled to add that full-immersion into an MMO can be dangerous for one's psyche. If one can spend 20-30 hours STRAIGHT playing a regular RPG or FPS game all the way through (I know there are a TON of you out there who do this - I'm guilty from time to time), then what's to keep them from playing an MMO for the same duration? Additionally, with MMOs, the game doesn't end, so they'd do this for days and days and weeks and weeks and months and months. Before you know it, they've grown tired of the game and discontinued their subscription. This was only hypothetical but I've seen it in friends and guildmates, so bash if you'd like, but if you're really wanting to make it as immersive as possible then this is only one scenario that you may have to look forward to.

Originally posted by Scottc

Originally posted by Pcgamer81

i disgree with OP. i think instances are good thing. heres examples. in WoW it's bad enough putting up with players camping or teaming same mobs yours is. but popular instances like say Deadmines would suk if other teams kept coming thru clearing things. now look at city of heroes the instances keep you alone keeping the hero and villian feel. sometimes instances are there to keep the fun up you don't like oh well theres those like me who want time away from those not in my group ot just need time alone. should instances be offline not at all not one bit. i pay to play mmo and i like to have instance option live with it.

I think you missed the op's point, why pay a monthly fee to play alone?  A singleplayer game should be fundamentally different in terms of game mechanics from an MMORPG.

And I think the OP missed the POINTS of instancing. Namely, it doesn't offer single player content when there are multiple players in the same instance. However, it doesn't give it the feel of "massively multiplayer" when in such a scenario.

I fail to see any evidence in this conjecture, but I'm all eyes if you have anything verifiably sound that I can read. Otherwise, we simply agree to disagree on whether instancing is a necessary means to MMOs.

In conclusion, the OP is simply stating his/her opinion when they say that instancing or the like could never contribute to a "great MMO". It not only lacks evidence, but sounds completely proposterous.

If the game is split into different servers, you are still split, and therefor offline according to your definition.

There are no multiplayer MMOs! rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble...

An interesting opinion... 

What "true" MMORPG do you currently play OP?

Originally posted by Scottc

Originally posted by Pcgamer81

i disgree with OP. i think instances are good thing. heres examples. in WoW it's bad enough putting up with players camping or teaming same mobs yours is. but popular instances like say Deadmines would suk if other teams kept coming thru clearing things. now look at city of heroes the instances keep you alone keeping the hero and villian feel. sometimes instances are there to keep the fun up you don't like oh well theres those like me who want time away from those not in my group ot just need time alone. should instances be offline not at all not one bit. i pay to play mmo and i like to have instance option live with it.

I think you missed the op's point, why pay a monthly fee to play alone?  A singleplayer game should be fundamentally different in terms of game mechanics from an MMORPG.

I think you have a comprehension problem. When is playing in a group of 5 in an instance playing ALONE?

When is selling my loot on an AH playing ALONE?

Originally posted by Scottc

Originally posted by Pcgamer81

i disgree with OP. i think instances are good thing. heres examples. in WoW it's bad enough putting up with players camping or teaming same mobs yours is. but popular instances like say Deadmines would suk if other teams kept coming thru clearing things. now look at city of heroes the instances keep you alone keeping the hero and villian feel. sometimes instances are there to keep the fun up you don't like oh well theres those like me who want time away from those not in my group ot just need time alone. should instances be offline not at all not one bit. i pay to play mmo and i like to have instance option live with it.

I think you missed the op's point, why pay a monthly fee to play alone?  A singleplayer game should be fundamentally different in terms of game mechanics from an MMORPG.

did you even read my post never said i play solo. i like to solo when theres no group. i group often. i made the point instances are great for solo or GROUP. please read whole thing before posting next time.

The TS is right.

MASSIVELLY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE ROLEPLAYING GAME 

IS DIFFERENT THAN

instanced multiplayer online roleplaying game.

New developers should name genres based on the ammount of players they can support without lag in the same area wich has to be 95% of the actual game area and the place wich 95% of the time is spent by players.

Why they instance? Its cheaper to maintain and easier to program, half assed job.

They choose that route ignoring what people really want.

And then use hoaxes like "we are instancing to prevent other people from ruining your group experience".

THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS FOR INSTANCING.

I HATE INSTANCING.

THOSE ARE NOT WORTH TO BE CALLED MMOS.

Originally posted by Interesting

The TS is right.

 

 

MASSIVELLY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE ROLEPLAYING GAME 

 

IS DIFFERENT THAN

 

instanced multiplayer online roleplaying game.

 

 

New developers should name genres based on the ammount of players they can support without lag in the same area wich has to be 95% of the actual game area and the place wich 95% of the time is spent by players.

 

Why they instance? Its cheaper to maintain and easier to program, half assed job.

They choose that route ignoring what people really want.

And then use hoaxes like "we are instancing to prevent other people from ruining your group experience".

THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS FOR INSTANCING.

I HATE INSTANCING.

THOSE ARE NOT WORTH TO BE CALLED MMOS.

LOL .. who cares about what it is called as long as it is fun. "instanced multiplayer online roleplaying game" >>> old MMORPGs in terms of fun factor. Happy now?

Originally posted by Interesting

The TS is right.

 

 

MASSIVELLY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE ROLEPLAYING GAME 

 

IS DIFFERENT THAN

 

instanced multiplayer online roleplaying game.

 

 

New developers should name genres based on the ammount of players they can support without lag in the same area wich has to be 95% of the actual game area and the place wich 95% of the time is spent by players.

 

Why they instance? Its cheaper to maintain and easier to program, half assed job.

They choose that route ignoring what people really want.

And then use hoaxes like "we are instancing to prevent other people from ruining your group experience".

THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS FOR INSTANCING.

I HATE INSTANCING.

THOSE ARE NOT WORTH TO BE CALLED MMOS.

So you won't be playing the "instanced" "games"?

If you don't like them it's your choice to NOT play them.

Cheers!

The OP is sooooo narrow minded.

Even RL has "instances": examples: a night at a football stadium, watching a boxing match, a cinema, the opera ("pun" intended).

Both elements have to be in a good developped game: the open seamless world which doesn't limit you to a single small fixed linair leveling path like War and Aion.

And at the same time instances in which you can watch or do things locked out from disturbing things that just spoil your fun.

The OP asks us to go visit the opera (pun intended) while kids jump in everywhere on stage and on your seat.

The OP fails as a typical Wow hater by even mentioning phasing. At last worlds can now change thanks to this invention. It's called immersion.

Originally posted by Interesting

The TS is right.

 

 

MASSIVELLY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE ROLEPLAYING GAME 

 

IS DIFFERENT THAN

 

instanced multiplayer online roleplaying game.

 

 

New developers should name genres based on the ammount of players they can support without lag in the same area wich has to be 95% of the actual game area and the place wich 95% of the time is spent by players.

 

Why they instance? Its cheaper to maintain and easier to program, half assed job.

They choose that route ignoring what people really want.

And then use hoaxes like "we are instancing to prevent other people from ruining your group experience".

THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS FOR INSTANCING.

I HATE INSTANCING.

THOSE ARE NOT WORTH TO BE CALLED MMOS.

I love when elitist asshats post stuff like this when the games they describe and want would only get 50k subscribers tops.

Originally posted by paradyme

Originally posted by Interesting

The TS is right.

 

 

MASSIVELLY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE ROLEPLAYING GAME 

 

IS DIFFERENT THAN

 

instanced multiplayer online roleplaying game.

 

 

New developers should name genres based on the ammount of players they can support without lag in the same area wich has to be 95% of the actual game area and the place wich 95% of the time is spent by players.

 

Why they instance? Its cheaper to maintain and easier to program, half assed job.

They choose that route ignoring what people really want.

And then use hoaxes like "we are instancing to prevent other people from ruining your group experience".

THERE IS NO FORGIVENESS FOR INSTANCING.

I HATE INSTANCING.

THOSE ARE NOT WORTH TO BE CALLED MMOS.

 

I love when elitist asshats post stuff like this when the games they describe and want would only get 50k subscribers tops.

Well but only games with so "few" subscribers would work without instancing.
I remember a game I played back in the day whose max. server population was only several hundred players.
But it had absolutely no instances and it worked just fine and was a hell of a lot fun.