I'm playing EQ again since a while, on Phinigel, the TLP server. When you listen to the LFG chat, you can notice that most of the LFG/LFM requests are for only two dungeons: Unrest and Guk. What makes these so special? Actually, Guk I can understand, it is a great place. But why Unrest over say, Najena or Runnyeye or Sol A?
I'm kind of worried that Pantheon may have several great dungeons for a given level range, but that the same thing will happen and people will congregate at only one or two. So how do you rate those factors that could make you choose one dungeon over another:
- loot?
- exp?
- accessibility (how "out of the way" can a dungeon be)?
- difficulty?
- can support multiple groups?
- dungeon setup (for example, crawling vs. camping)?
- ability to sell nearby (or in dungeon)?
What would you do to prevent one dungeon from be left aside by the players?
For me it was atmosphere. And, I've always enjoyed the eerie zones like Gukbottom and Unrest with both having undead, secret passages, death trains etc. But, on your example with Phinigel - a lot of it at this point is nostalgia and people wanting to experience their favorite zones. And, after 17 years, people have found the easiest/best/quickest way to level.
Great question though... And to fully answer it:
Loot - I'd say each dungeon needs to have 1-2 key pieces for the quarternity which makes players want to travel. Also you could add Pantheon specific type loot with the codex/multi-colored mana system - you could add spell drops, relics, skills etc.
Exp - I think this could vary based off risk/reward. And, some of the "riskier" zones could have a higher base Zone exp modifier to attract those who want greater rewards.
Accessibility - pretty much same as above - it would be impossible to design Pantheon with dungeons that are always going to be in central hub type areas. However, dungeons in outlying areas need proper incentive to get players to want to travel further whether that be loot, epic quests, spell drops, skills etc.
Multiple Groups - all dungeons should support multiple groups - and I'd also add I'd want wide level ranges.
Crawl vs Camp - I've talked about this in length on this board in the past - but I definitely prefer Camp. It allows for the socialization and strategic gameplay that existed in EQ. That doesn't mean one couldn't crawl to get to that camp though. I've included a few links to old threads for reference:
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/1564/round-table-discussion-questions/view/page/4
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2269/dungeon-crawl-or-camping/view/page/1
Ability to sell - again this is what EQ got right and made faction/race selection more meaningful. I want the ability to sell to be tied to location. Like Unrest and evil players having a difficult time to sell so I had to rely on other players to sell or trade gold for plat etc. It adds another layer of depth.
Ultimately, if emergent gameplay exists and Pantheon is more sandboxy without quests/quest hubs on rails leading you to different dungeons - favorite spots are bound to form. But, it would be on the developers to create content meaningful enough to want to get players to explore areas outside the established norms.
That's a good question!
And I think you might have also answered your own question. =)
In my opinion popularity of a location is a combination of everything you listed. With the most important factor being difficulty. There's got to be a sweet spot where it's not too hard nor too difficult while being accessible.
The only thing I can think to add to your list right now would be, the creativeness of the dungeon itself so that it's an interesting place on it's own. Think that plays a role too.
Sarim said:I'm kind of worried that Pantheon may have several great dungeons for a given level range, but that the same thing will happen and people will congregate at only one or two. So how do you rate those factors that could make you choose one dungeon over another:
- loot?
- exp?
- accessibility (how "out of the way" can a dungeon be)?
- difficulty?
- can support multiple groups?
- dungeon setup (for example, crawling vs. camping)?
- ability to sell nearby (or in dungeon)?What would you do to prevent one dungeon from be left aside by the players?
Raiden echoes my thought as well..atmosphere. The look, the feel, the sounds echoing off the walls...all making the hairs on my arms stand up, that little shiver that goes down your spine. Years later I still got that whenever I went to LowerGuk, SolA, RunnyEye, Charasis, Temple of Veeshan to name a few.
Loot Importance: 2 Dungeons should have some All/All items or archetype appropriate items (like for all priests so CLR/DRU/SHM. There should be some class appropriate items too. No one dungeon should have more items for one archetype or class than the others.
Exp Importance: 3 This should be dynamic, based upon several factors: How far away is this dungeon from a town or bind point? Is the dungeon accessible from the world surface or must I travel through one (or more) dungeons to reach my target dungeon..just to name a few. Case in point would be comparing SolB with Permafrost. SolB was 100feet from a druid portal and a very short run from Freeport for good race bind point. By contrast Permafrost was at the furthest end of Everfrost Peaks with neither wizard nor druid portals nearby. Permafrost should have had a much higher exp modifier than SolB.
Accessibility Importance: 1 This might seem counter intuitive, but dungeons should be remote, difficult to find, easy to get into but very difficult to get out of. It's easier falling into a trap than getting out of one. Some dungeons should only be accessible by going through other dungeons. It shouldn't be guaranteed that where you enter a dungeon isn't the same as where you exit a dungeon. This aspect is the foundation off which everything about the dungeon is based. Its loot, its exp modifier, its difficulty, etc.
Difficulty Importance: 2 Dungeons must be difficult, far more difficult than above-world content. It should at a level where the best players can challenge themselves against the best content. Only if you know every aspect of your class and how the strengths and weaknesses of skills and abilities of your group can you survive the difficulty of a dungeon.
Multiple Groups Importance: 1 Dungeons should be large, massive really, able to support a dozen groups or more even in the lowest level dungeons. That's not to say we shouldn't see some 'pocket dungeons' because they can be nice as well. I look at it this way: The square footage of the overworld should be but a fraction of the square footage of dungeons existing below ground.
Setup Importance: 3 Camp or Crawl makes no real difference to me as I enjoy both equally. What should the developers should be wary of is trying to fit both approaches into a single dungeon. You don't want camping groups getting run over by groups that want to crawl.
Nearby Sell Importance: 4 This goes back to the accessibility factor. Dungeons shouldn't be convenient. They are dungeons after all. What civilization would want dungeons full of dangerous monsters nearby? Not a smart one. Sorry, but if you want convenience then stay in the overworld.
EDIT:
One critical aspect of dungeons that needs to be treated very carefully is the equivalence factor. All things being equal, one dungeon should not have better XP, better loot, better design, etc over another. A dungeon of X level that is very near a city should not be filled with better loot and have better XP than the same level dungeon way out past the far end of nowwhere. Frankly, EQ1 was garbage at balancing their dungeons.
Permafrost and Nagafen's Lair, both dungeons of similar level but vastly different in the quality of loot and XP. Nagafen's Lair was a short walk from 2 bindable cities and had a druid portal not 200 feet from the entrance. This is in contrast to Permafrost that was at the furthest point of Everfrost Peaks, no wizard or druid portal nearby. Yet Nagafen's Lair had far better XP, and loot of a far higher quality and usefullness.
This isn't to say a remote dungeon should have better loot, xp, etc than a dungeon nearer to a city. If they are of the same level spread, they should be equally desirable. If you want as many pieces of level appropriate dungeon drops as possible, you should need to go to both dungeons.
I hope some of the dungeon aspects from Vanguard make it into the game, Hive of Zihurr mechanics Fallen Lyceum with its floating dungeon and khegor's End (without the elevator bug). They all had stories around them. You could see where the game was headed before it was bastardized and the end game content sucked the life out of you. I don't mind camping a dungeon at times but i'd prefer a reason to keep moving and not knowing what is going to happen next. It would be great if some dungeons changed and didn't stagnate.
Using your list:
-loot?
- exp?
- accessibility (how "out of the way" can a dungeon be)?
- difficulty?
- can support multiple groups?
- dungeon setup (for example, crawling vs. camping)?
- ability to sell nearby (or in dungeon)?
Difficulty has to be first on everyones list if they are being realistic. If a zone is to difficult you won't get loot or exp etc.
Assuming the difficulty is managable then loot or exp are the primary goals. If I had to choose, I'd rather have great loot and bad exp than great exp and bad loot.
Of the others on the list the only one that could even be a small factor is "can support multiple groups". If there is only one good camp and it is camped when you get there then it is a waste of time.
The ability to sell means nothing. I will leave all the garbage loot to rot. As far as accessibility, if I don't have time to travel to an out of the way place I shouldn't be trying to find a group anyway.
My two requirements for a dungeon are loot and experience. If there is no loot which is an upgrade then it is a shame but I'd probably still go there for the experience. If a dungeon didn't offer any bonus experiece via a zone experience modifier like that in EverQuest then I'd likely just get experience in an easier spot outside of a dungeon. So those two things are really important to me.
I don't mind travelling at all to go to a dungeon as the fun you find in them is well worth the effort especially when you are playing with friends. I do prefer dungeon camps rather than dungeon crawling but I'd do either if my group prefered to do a dungeon crawl or a dungeon camp. I'm pretty easy on either one.
A dungeon abolutely must be able to support multiple groups though. If it can't then it would be perma camped all the time and that just makes the game feel too small which I think is going against what the developers are trying to achieve. As for selling normally we have a master looter who then goes and sells at intervals so that is important otherwise their bags get full and they can't loot anything else.
I would like to talk about what I consider my favorite dungeon of all time and point out some reasons about why I consider it great (off the top of my head...it has been 10-15 years).
Temple of Veeshan (ToV). ...some people consider it a raid zone but bear with me. It is so much more than that. Dungeon/Exp/Loot/Faction/named/raid mobs/extra bonus areas etc.
Firstly, it was filled with dragons. All kinds. Who doesn't like dragons?
There were 3 main factions...located in each of 3 wings in the dungeon. 2 factions opposed each other and one was kos to everyone.
It made you choose which of the 2 opposing factions you wanted to side with. If you killed mobs in one wing you would increase your faction with the other wing that would then give you access to quests (from boss mobs) from the wing you gained faction with. The quests were usually able to be completed elsewhere in TOV but maybe they had requirements outside the dungeon as well. You always had the option to switch your faction back to the other but of course that was a long grind killing in the other wing.
The "trash mobs" and named in the two opposing factions wings dropped quest armor pieces based on type "cloth", "leather", "chain" "plate" etc. These made very nice, class specific armor for that time period. It was basically stepping stone armor. About the 2nd or 3rd best tier armor of the day that would prepare you to be able to fight some of the raid mob bosses that were further in the dungeon. The trash mobs/named were usually 3-4 group necessary mobs (about halfish or less of a normal full raid force). The spawn time on the trash mobs (that dropped armor pieces rarely) was about a half hour if I remember correctly...and the named mobs (that dropped armor pieces frequently) was maybe two hours (dont quote me on those numbers). Because of those short spawn times it allowed guilds to go in and farm armor to gear everyone up. You could clear the trash mobs and named and it would be about time for repops. This is the place that I fondly remember 24 hour a day, weekend long raids. People in guild would come and go as they pleased and we would be constantly clearing the trash mobs/named to gear everyone up since you only needed 3-4 groups.
In each of the 3 wings, further in, there were multiple raid mobs one after the other with wandering trash mobs in between. Usually, the easier bosses were first and the hardest (with the best loot) was last so you would have to clear in them order to reach the end. This made for a nice stepping stone type challenge. It made for a good progression as you figured out the fight strategy and continued to gear up.
Also, if you decided that you could take the faction hit, you were able to walk all the way to the end of the wing if you wanted because you had positive faction with that side...and attack that raid boss without killing any of the trash...or named...or bosses before it, because nothing was kos to you. This was a neat option.
To this point I have only been talking about the two wings with opposing faction. There was also the "main wing" that is kos to everyone. It was basically all raid mobs...with some wanderers to clear in between. Once again this is a long skinny wing of the dungeon that requires you to kill the bosses in order. It has been a long time, but I seem to remember each boss having abilities that kind of tested you on something different. Maybe one was poison/acid or different elements, different abilities/tactics. Untill the last boss which was kind of a combination of them all. It was very challenging for the day and went unbeaten for awhile.
And then the kicker. For a long time...maybe an expansion or two? The only way to get to the Plane of Mischief was to beat the final boss in the north wing and click on the little castle. It opened up a whole new zone. It was filled with quests and soloable mobs and a couple more low level bosses. No great loot or anything, just a great feeling that you got there...and it was a pretty neat area to explore.
I kind of remember other, ouotside quests that also dropped pieces from named mobs there...maybe a part of the sleepers tomb key?
So to recap:
Lots of Dragons
Multiple opposing factions that you have to choose which one to side with that offer quests. This can be manipulated to help you kill bosses more easily depending on how you work the faction.
Good loot drops from the normal trash mobs/wanders that people actually want that were able to be used by a number of different classes based on the same drop. (good but not the best) with reasonable spawn times that allow for farming trash mobs (this isn't done enough imho...usually trash mobs are just something you want to kill through as fast as possible to get to the named/boss)
Boss mobs that increase in difficulty as you progress further in to let people feel like they accomplish something even if they wipe before reaching the end.
Boss mobs that tested your group on how well rounded you were by attacking you with many different varieties of tactics
Outside quests that require drops from the zone.
Extra hidden areas that are only accessible from deep inside that are challenging to reach. This is fantastic!
I'm just remembering now...I think there was probably a key quest required just to get in the zone? I dunno.
Forgive me if I remember any of those specifics incorrectly. It has been a really long time. But I will always remember that dungeon very fondly. If Pantheon produces a dungeon that I like even close to as much as I liked TOV then VR will have done a fantastic job.
philo said:I would like to talk about what I consider my favorite dungeon of all time and point out some reasons about why I consider it great (off the top of my head...it has been 10-15 years).
Temple of Veeshan (ToV). ...some people consider it a raid zone but bear with me. It is so much more than that. Dungeon/Exp/Loot/Faction/named/raid mobs/extra bonus areas etc.
Firstly, it was filled with dragons. All kinds. Who doesn't like dragons?
There were 3 main factions...located in each of 3 wings in the dungeon. 2 factions opposed each other and one was kos to everyone.
It made you choose which of the 2 opposing factions you wanted to side with. If you killed mobs in one wing you would increase your faction with the other wing that would then give you access to quests (from boss mobs) from the wing you gained faction with. The quests were usually able to be completed elsewhere in TOV but maybe they had requirements outside the dungeon as well. You always had the option to switch your faction back to the other but of course that was a long grind killing in the other wing.
Philo , Your reply is awsome and quite correct as far as I an concerned. This is a Masterfully done Raiding Area. I can only hope we have something like this zone.
The old restrictions I think were that you had to be around level 48 and not KOS to the Claws of Veeshan Faction. I remember doing something that had taken me from dubious to KOS with COV and I had to kill Frost Giants and turn in their helmets in Skyshrine to some guy there. Now Veeshans Peak , that required a Key in the old days, but killing there would destroy your Faction with COV in TOV :)
I also really liked TOV and would recommend just stealing it from EQ and dropping it in a cold place for us to enjoy. :)
Great reply Philo, I enjoyed it and the memories.
Skycaster Crimsonhands
Some nice art work on the walls, big rug to give it that homely feeling.
agree with just about all Vandraad said.
to add, in my perfect world dungeons would be essentially the Mines of Moria from the lord of the rings books. a hollowed out mountain, with multiple entrances, some easier to fnd than others. a sprawling complex of grand halls, mansions, tombs, etc., easy to get lost in, lots of bits of lore to discover, ability to climb to the peaks, or work your way to the depths beneath the world... and of course a variety of enemies of varying power to encounter. maybe some parts have differing level mobs, going to the depths is too dangerous at level 30, come back at level 40. basically, a zone unto themselves.
perhaps this would mean there are fewer of them, because of the scope. im fine with that. dungeons should be a special adventure.
Lets look at Crush Bone that place was a master peice diffrent camps for diffrent lvl's till you got to 13ish and camped Emperor Crush for his awsome dwarvin ringmale tunic I swaer to god that tunic was more of a status every one wanted one.
How about Oasis open world cant say you did not love Oasis lockjaw hide tunic and glowing crook
I belive what makes these places memorable is the need to be their to lvl up and the items that prepaird you for the next zone and the congregation of people the camps.
I think it comes down to biggest bang for your buck in most cases. It depends on if your focus is loot or exp, but the end result is usually the same. People will find which places yield them the best loot/exp per hour and stick with those places and that can be determined by mob exp, mob qty, ease of access, or how crowded an area may get.
This might be slightly cynical of me, but after playing P99 and noticing some trends, I'm afraid I've come to the conclusion that the overwhelming thing that made those particular dungeons so attractive - Crushbone, Solb, Guk, Unrest - was ZEM. Experience modifiers.
In the beginning of EQ, when travelling was at its hardest and any experience was good experience, when tarnished weapons were the norm and anyone walking around in bronze or banded was a god among men, all dungeons were visited depending on proximity. If you were in Freeport and lvl 11, you'd be in Befallen. Faydark? Crushbone. Qeynos? Blackburrow. Erudin? ....uh, you rerolled. But once EQ became a bit more top heavy, and twinks abounded, and ports were easier to come by, then it didn't matter where you started, it only mattered where you ended up. And where you ended up was always Crushbone, Unrest, Guk, Solb. Places like Najena, Beholders Maze, Clan Runnyeye, Mistmoore, Splitpaw, etc became less than.
What I would like to see is an equal ZEM across the board for all dungeons. I'd like dungeons to be visited, as a rule, for the fact that you gain MORE experience in a dungeon, but for which dungeon exactly to be visited based on convenience (proximity) and by it's general allure as a zone. By it's atmosphere, loot, ambience, lore, and all these other factors ya'll are espousing here.
Someone mentioned Khegor's End in Vanguard. I don't know what the ZEM of that dungeon was, but I LOVED it. Absolutely loved it. That place was huge. You had the option of setting up camp or fighting your way down to the king. Room for everyone.
Vanguard did dungeons right. There were so many of them for every lvl range. I can only imagine an alternate reality where Vanguard was and remained popular, and all of those off the beaten path dungeons were used and explored. Even near the end, one could still Wiki a particular dungeon and not find a shred of info on it. It was wonderful, but also sad.
I have faith that Pantheon will do it right.
My favorite dungeons were SolB and Velks. I played a lot of other dungeons but these seemed to be better than all the rest. For one thing there weren't a lot have hidden traps and pitfalls that had to be memorized in order to navigate the dungeon. Another great part about it was the size of the camp areas allowing for sufficient space for a group to operate.
Most of the replies I've seen on this thread talk about exp, loot, and location as the main driving forces behind picking which dungeons are popular. I completely agree with those reasons as well because most people won't even set foot in a zone that doesn't provide some type of reward for doing the content. However I think that enjoyment is also a big part of the equation.
I've gone through all of the old world dungeons and I just don't enjoy most of them.
Befallen had keys and doors and a pit trap. Those aren't fun mechanics to have to rely on for progression through the dungeon. Having some keys as side options is fine, having a pit that takes you a little out of your way is fine, but when they are the core mechanic there are problems.
Najena had invisible holes in the floor, another key requirement, and a claustrophobic feel. There was very little room for maneuvering and if you didn't have a map or very good spatial awareness then it was easy to get lost. I was part of a guild that tried to raid Najena for fun and it was a disaster as the group ended up split up and roaming everywhere because the layout was poor.
Runnyeye is another tiny dungeon with so many ways to get lost. Not to mention the high number of pats and mobs that get pulled forcing groups to have high amounts of CC or AoE.
Contrast those designs with Sol and Velks. A few main paths with smaller branches which lead back to the main path. Large movement corridors. Camp areas provide enough room for the group to spread out allowing for parking CC to be done. One or two small trap areas which force the player to retrace steps instead of putting them somewhere inaccessible. Several main camp areas allowing for five or six groups to all have a spot.
The loot didn't really matter that much in these dungeons because the exp was the real goal. Which seems to hold true in almost all dungeons which are used while a person is levelling up. We don't really farm loot until we top out on levels and are trying to improve our character.
Guk is an example of a dungeon, which was popular for the loot, but was mainly used because it was the top end dungeon. Leveling up in Guk was not as much fun because it was also a tight, confusing dungeon. Once you leveled up enough that you could safely handle a small encounter the dungeon became a place to farm.
I think dungeons have to be looked at in two terms. Exp dungeons for levelling with pick up groups and loot dungeons which are done as part of a raid or farmed once levels are high enough to make travel in the dungeon somewhat safe. Trying to make dungeons fit both of these goals is nearly impossible and will lead to one being more popular than the other.
Another consideration is the fact that when EQ came out there was no instancing but now it is commonplace. This allows a lot of leeway in how dungeons are built. What if there were two versions of SolB? One was the exp version which was an instance the group could choose. The instance would have mini-bosses at each of the camp spots and then when the dungeon was cleared a boss mob would spawn. The instance would be tailored to the groups level and would offer level appropriate gear. The static dungeon would be filled with high level mobs requiring two or more groups per encounter.
There are a lot of options that instancing provides to help regulate which dungeons are popular. Rotating exp bonuses, weekly item boosts, vanity items, short term changes such as invasions, and themed events are all ways that instancing could be used to keep people moving to different dungeons. In the end the players will seek the best exp and loot they can get with minimal hassle. A small portion of the population will look for a challenge but even that challenge has to provide enough reward to make the effort worthwhile.
Ruar said:Another consideration is the fact that when EQ came out there was no instancing but now it is commonplace. This allows a lot of leeway in how dungeons are built. What if there were two versions of SolB? One was the exp version which was an instance the group could choose. The instance would have mini-bosses at each of the camp spots and then when the dungeon was cleared a boss mob would spawn. The instance would be tailored to the groups level and would offer level appropriate gear. The static dungeon would be filled with high level mobs requiring two or more groups per encounter.
There are a lot of options that instancing provides to help regulate which dungeons are popular. Rotating exp bonuses, weekly item boosts, vanity items, short term changes such as invasions, and themed events are all ways that instancing could be used to keep people moving to different dungeons. In the end the players will seek the best exp and loot they can get with minimal hassle. A small portion of the population will look for a challenge but even that challenge has to provide enough reward to make the effort worthwhile.
I like your post but disagree with the part I've quoted. I, like many others here, really don't like the idea of instancing at all. I think it makes the game world feel smaller and you lose contact with other people in the zone because you are in different instances. Also giving rewards like that will just trivialise the content. I think people should be forced to group in non-instanced dungesons and the loot should be the same for everyone. If your group is not good enough to handle the zone then you should try when you are higher level or get better players. A dungeon should be a challenge. It shouldn't just be easy mode farming and experience. If you want a reward in Pantheon you should be forced to take a risk and to do something that might result in a complete group wipe if you do something wrong. That is what makes the game so exciting. The fact that you could die at any minute if you are not part of a good group.
The other advantage of the above is that you really get to know your group mates and you can make friends with people if they do their job well and you also get to know other people in the zone just through general chat.
Overall I'm pretty much against instancing and I think a lot of other people on these forums agree with me based on previous discussions. I just don't see that many advantages to it.
Yesd Raidan, Yes Vandraad
and Kailo makes a good point. Some of those "early" dungeons give you a nice taste and hopefully, give some enthusiasm. Who can forget forging through the tight ans narrow passages od Befallen? Or Blackburrow, or The Warrens.
What I liked about blackburrow and warrens was they ahd alternat tight and broad spaces- and they lead to somewhere else, But they were places where the adventure was good and very nice for grouping or learning others mechanics and learning the game.
The warrens also had the mini-Dragon (muglwump) Which was a neat "practice" for a high-teen low 20;s group or maybe 2 groups of lower charasters and the loot for the level was pretty good. I knew a mage that carried that fishing pole for a long time.
Cromulent said:Ruar said:Another consideration...
I like your post but disagree with the part I've quoted. I, like many others here, really don't like the idea of instancing at all. I think it makes the game world feel smaller and you lose contact with other people in the zone because you are in different instances. Also giving rewards like that will just trivialise the content. I think people should be forced to group in non-instanced dungesons and the loot should be the same for everyone. If your group is not good enough to handle the zone then you should try when you are higher level or get better players. A dungeon should be a challenge. It shouldn't just be easy mode farming and experience. If you want a reward in Pantheon you should be forced to take a risk and to do something that might result in a complete group wipe if you do something wrong. That is what makes the game so exciting. The fact that you could die at any minute if you are not part of a good group.
The other advantage of the above is that you really get to know your group mates and you can make friends with people if they do their job well and you also get to know other people in the zone just through general chat.
Overall I'm pretty much against instancing and I think a lot of other people on these forums agree with me based on previous discussions. I just don't see that many advantages to it.
There are different options when it comes to making an instance. It doesn't have to mean that only one group is in the instance. Maybe shard is a better term. Either way, using the example of Sol B we could have five groups in one instance/shard interacting with each other doing a regular dungeon. Then there could be the single group instance that is increased difficulty but with the mini-bosses and dungeon boss. Then the static dungeon with the raid level mobs and leading to Nagafen eventually.
As for difficulty I agree there needs to be risk vs reward. A dungeon shouldn't be considered trivial but at the same time we know that as players level and gear up there is no way to avoid content becoming trivial. Having different options of going through the dungeon can help make that content last longer, provide something the players enjoy, and increase the risk as the reward is increased as well.
Keep in mind the majority of people aren't interested in tedious content designed to be a time sink. When EQ was in it's heyday there was no competition so spending time grinding and grinding was all that we knew. Since that time though if a game want to live longer than a few months the content has to be easy to access and not be a boring grind. Proof can be found in the popularity of WoW and the way Aion fell hard despite having some great flight mechanics.
Pantheon will need to make sure people can group easily, that less than optimal groups can still allow content to be completed, and ensure the content is interesting. A static dungeon where a few strong groups can lock down the zone and prevent anyone else from having fun is not the way to big subscription numbers. Sitting at the zone line for an hour trying to sell your character to get an open spot in a group is not how you inspire people to continue playing the game.
Which is why I think both static and instanced options need to exist. The instanced can provide varying levels of difficulty to cater to the most number of people while at the same time making sure there is plenty of challenge for those who want more of an old school feeling.
Ruar said:Cromulent said:Ruar said:Another consideration...
I like your post but disagree with the part I've quoted. I, like many others here, really don't like the idea of instancing at all. I think it makes the game world feel smaller and you lose contact with other people in the zone because you are in different instances. Also giving rewards like that will just trivialise the content. I think people should be forced to group in non-instanced dungesons and the loot should be the same for everyone. If your group is not good enough to handle the zone then you should try when you are higher level or get better players. A dungeon should be a challenge. It shouldn't just be easy mode farming and experience. If you want a reward in Pantheon you should be forced to take a risk and to do something that might result in a complete group wipe if you do something wrong. That is what makes the game so exciting. The fact that you could die at any minute if you are not part of a good group.
The other advantage of the above is that you really get to know your group mates and you can make friends with people if they do their job well and you also get to know other people in the zone just through general chat.
Overall I'm pretty much against instancing and I think a lot of other people on these forums agree with me based on previous discussions. I just don't see that many advantages to it.
There are different options when it comes to making an instance. It doesn't have to mean that only one group is in the instance. Maybe shard is a better term. Either way, using the example of Sol B we could have five groups in one instance/shard interacting with each other doing a regular dungeon. Then there could be the single group instance that is increased difficulty but with the mini-bosses and dungeon boss. Then the static dungeon with the raid level mobs and leading to Nagafen eventually.
As for difficulty I agree there needs to be risk vs reward. A dungeon shouldn't be considered trivial but at the same time we know that as players level and gear up there is no way to avoid content becoming trivial. Having different options of going through the dungeon can help make that content last longer, provide something the players enjoy, and increase the risk as the reward is increased as well.
Keep in mind the majority of people aren't interested in tedious content designed to be a time sink. When EQ was in it's heyday there was no competition so spending time grinding and grinding was all that we knew. Since that time though if a game want to live longer than a few months the content has to be easy to access and not be a boring grind. Proof can be found in the popularity of WoW and the way Aion fell hard despite having some great flight mechanics.
Pantheon will need to make sure people can group easily, that less than optimal groups can still allow content to be completed, and ensure the content is interesting. A static dungeon where a few strong groups can lock down the zone and prevent anyone else from having fun is not the way to big subscription numbers. Sitting at the zone line for an hour trying to sell your character to get an open spot in a group is not how you inspire people to continue playing the game.
Which is why I think both static and instanced options need to exist. The instanced can provide varying levels of difficulty to cater to the most number of people while at the same time making sure there is plenty of challenge for those who want more of an old school feeling.
Good points. But Pantheon has always been sold as a niche MMO. Of course the devs want to get the maximum number of subscribers they can. It would be bad business not to want that. But I don't think they are planning on watering down the content to appeal to the masses. I think they are really trying hard to appeal to the older MMO players which means having things like contested content and tough areas that require real skill to complete.
If I remember correctly they are trying to build this game to appeal to old EQ, Vanguard, Ultima Online era players but they think that their ideas might also appeal to younger players who haven't experienced games like Pantheon before. Perhaps players whos first MMO was World of Warcraft for example. If you read about World of Warcraft these days there is a large group of people who are really unhappy with the way the game has gone and a game like Pantheon might appeal to them because it offers something different to the whole World of Warcraft way of doing things. I absolutely believe that gamers like difficult games. Just look at the success of games like Dark Souls.
I might be wrong of course but I hope they stick to their guns when it comes to development. I'm really looking forward to having that EQ feeling back again.
I think dungeons are a vital part of making this game successful. I remember in my old EQ days you always had a dungeon you were leveling up to be able to go to. Even starting out at level 1 in Freeport you were working those levels to be able to go to your first dungeon...Befallen. And thus was the case no matter where you started out in Norrath and as you leveled up there was another dungeon you would soon be able to enter. They were scary as hell and you had no chance of navigating your way thru them alone. Invis was no good as there was a see invis mob around every corner. And if you died it became even more scary when you got back there to try and retrieve your corpse.
Before I say anything else I would like to say this... THERE SHOULD BE ZERO INSTANCED DUNGEONS. And for that matter there shouldnt be anything instanced in this entire game. Good competitive gaming is what us old schoolers want and need.
Moving on... some dungeons in EQ had multiple floors and required killing mobs for keys to access the next floor. Some were like mazes and full of traps and very confusing to learn even after being there many times. Others were very simply laid out but the mobs were even more dangerous and required some serious skills for your group to move around. The tougher the dungeon the greater the reward. Take Lower Guk for example back in Classic EQ. This was the first dungeon that showed us some REAL loot and made us feel like we were uber. If you were hanging out in Lguk then you were considered one of the elite on the server. The experiences and feelings i had from this place can probably never be matched again but I sure hope the devs can give us something to rival those feelings we all once felt.
Then comes end game raid dungeons. I feel like this may be the most important of them all. There needs to be many of them and they need to be hard. There should be some that have quest armor lines and these quests need to be difficult. They should involve faction and this faction shouldnt be easy to get. There should be other dungeons that are straightforward killing and looting. There should be progression dungeons that require killing X mob to get to X boss then killing X boss to move to the next area of the dungeon. Then rinse and repeat all the way thru. There could also be raid areas buried deep within lower level dungeons as well that require completing a key quest to access or even a dungeon that serves as a lair to a certain dragon (Remember Trakanon?) where people can xp but requires a raid force to get down to the dragon. There just needs to be a lot of variety for raiding to keep us raiding types busy so we dont burn out. There should also be a good variety of dungeons for max level characters to 1 group in as well so we dont have to make alts when we are not raiding just to keep us busy. I do love my alts tho and I always love progressing thru the game again and getting a chance to level up somewhere different than my previous character. But we shouldnt have to rely on raiding once we are max level for our only means of obtaining loot altho the loot from raiding should obviously be far superior to what could be had from a single group. 1 concept I loved from Vanguard was all the quest armor lines as you leveled up. The armor was somewhat difficult to obtain and required putting time in but I remember how happy I was when I finished my CS weapon quest in my mid 30s.
I am pretty much just repeating what has already been said but I cant say enough how important having a large variety of dungeons as you progress thru the game and how much more important it is at end game. Lets hope they know what they are doing and we are blown away!
I'm just a bit confused why people think having instanced options means there is no static content. I know the trend is either the zone is completely instanced or it's static, but why not have both? I just don't get why someone would want to limit their options by only having a static dungeon instead of building in instanced options to promote more people playing.
I believe there should be low level dungeons around starting cities just to get people acquainted with "something more dangerous than the usual." Some quests to lead the beginners into the dungeon area (Crushbone belts, Runnyeye beads, Gnoll Fangs). My first starting level dungeon was Crushbone! My first experience with trains was Crushbone! Dungeons I did not get to experience when first starting out were an attractive feature to start somewhere else (Blackburrow, for example). Dungeons are fun from the point of view that things are more tight, more dangerous, and require extra vigilance - all part of the MMORPG a la D&D experience. We all love dungeons! And for many of us we still remember our first dungeons! It was part of our "formative" years and it lasts. Unfortunately, they don't have longevity once you level past their recommended level and thus need a constant source of new subscribers or player alts to keep them from becoming stagnant. However, I have ideas on what can be done to keep them relevant - which means I am sure others have ideas that can keep them relevant.
I also believe there should be mid-level dungeons that require some travel to get to and increasing dangers. It could even be the same dungeon but multiple levels wher it gets increasingly dangerous. I did like Unrest, Najena (when there were still J-boots in there), Mistmoore, Cazic Thule, for example. But in those earlier years they were just simply crowded and it was no fun for a one encounter every 15 minutes or so. So exploring more and farther for some out of the way places. Leads me to Paw - and I am in the minority, here, but it was my favorite dungeon. It was so far out of the way and so difficult to find that it was empty! And the group I played with loved it! We could play at our own pace. We were basically alone. And best of all we could hide out and away from those others that would troll you and try to follow you and stick with you because of some sort of real life relationship issues. This was Paw before the upgrade. This was before there were people who had achieved level 50. This was before people had even gone to the Planes. This was before EQ even had the Kunark expansion. Some may remember my difficulty playing my character (outlined in my Introduce yourself section). So escaping from "unwanted suitors" (to be polite) also contributed to my "formative years." So I loved Paw. And from that point I would like to see a couple dungeons that are out of the way for the purpose of "getting out of the way - just to be somewhere else." Loot won't matter but having some fun will matter.
I won't comment on high level dungeons since that will be where everyone will congregate to, eventually, and play most of their time so everything has already been said. I just would like to see dungeon content for low and mid levels even at the risk of those dungeons / zones becomming stagnant and unused (although, as mentioned, I have ideas to keep them relevant and so believe others have ideas to keep them relevant).