So most mmo's that have been released in the last decade have been nothing more than solo games. Most are do quests to level with very little interaction with other players. Sure you will see them in passing moveing from one question to the next. Where is the massive multiplayer online? Sure most are massive and online, but do they need to be online? Where is the multiplayer? Sure there are many other people playing, but with very little interaction with you or others. This is what I think will make Pantheon special. The memories I remember are ones that include other players and friends. I don't get those fond memories from solo content.
zewtastic said:I'll go you one more.
Any MMO using instancing is just a single group/solo game. No immersion, no challenge.
Once an MMO is instanced one of those 'M's should be dropped.
Instancing is fine. It shouldn't be used for all content but on the flip side content denial is a good way to have players lose interest in your game more quickly.
While I have nothing in particular against instances, they don't constitute an MMO for the simple reason they aren't persistent. Most games called MMOs actually are, though, as they do have large persistant areas where you can encounter other players accidentally.
I wouldn't really count Dungeons & Dragons Online as an MMORPG, a good game but not persistent. Battle for Azeroth sucks, imo, but by all metrics its still an MMO.
MMORPG =/= good game, I'm unsure why that's somehow controversial?
Zyellinia said:zewtastic said:I'll go you one more.
Any MMO using instancing is just a single group/solo game. No immersion, no challenge.
Once an MMO is instanced one of those 'M's should be dropped.
Instancing is fine. It shouldn't be used for all content but on the flip side content denial is a good way to have players lose interest in your game more quickly.
I disagree, I'm more than happy to wait my turn on content, and feel it's all the more gratifying when I finally do get mine.
Do you have stats to back that up or are you, like me just offering your own opinion of it?
Zyellinia said:zewtastic said:I'll go you one more.
Any MMO using instancing is just a single group/solo game. No immersion, no challenge.
Once an MMO is instanced one of those 'M's should be dropped.
Instancing is fine. It shouldn't be used for all content but on the flip side content denial is a good way to have players lose interest in your game more quickly.
Are you an %$^&&*? Instancing is the 100% most impactive aspect of any MMO. Instancing destroys what MMO means fundamentally.
>Are you an %$^&&*? Instancing is the 100% most impactive aspect of any MMO. Instancing destroys what MMO means fundamentally.<
Maybe just a trace of hyperbele here?
A bit of instancing is more likely to be good than bad if done right. Even if *every* dungeon is totally instanced all it does is eliminate competition in dungeons - a feature that many people like but many people do *not* like. It doesn't restrict grouping in any way whatsoever - it merely changes the environment in which the group functions.
I am not arguing in favor of instancing all dungeons just saying that even such an extreme step which Pantheon would never consider would not be as important as many other MMO features (speed of leveling, challenge from mobs, crafting, travel etc.) much less affect *any* fundamental aspect of the MMO.
Outside of pvp, competition with other players is in no way fundamental to a MMO. We universally describe servers that are not pvp as being pve. The "e" stands for environment not "other players".
dorotea said:I am not arguing in favor of instancing all dungeons just saying that even such an extreme step which Pantheon would never consider would not be as important as many other MMO features (speed of leveling, challenge from mobs, crafting, travel etc.) much less affect *any* fundamental aspect of the MMO.
For me personally, instancing (or in Pantheon's case, no instancing) is definitely as important as those other MMO features. I dabble in many different games, including WoW, GW2... I've played Secret World Legends where at least they are marketing it for what it is: a "single player experience in a shared world". I want one game where there are no instances. Like when I played EQ way back when. I'm glad I will have that one option in Pantheon.
Instancing wasn’t the only thing that encouraged selfish, narcissistic behavior in WoW. Some people rolled need on everything they could – They could sell that bound item they don’t want for some money to a vender, or they could break it down for an enchanting piece that they might use … or sell that on the auction house. With an unlimited source of new people to take advantage of with the group making cross-server tool, their reputation just didn’t matter. After a while, most people (who wouldn’t even consider doing such things) just got tired of being taken advantage of and started to do the same (in PUG’s).
The point is: It wasn’t necessarily instancing that deters a healthy social atmosphere in MMORPG’s. There are many, many tools at a developer’s disposal. It’s how they are applied together.
TLDR: It’s not the tool (instancing). It is the culmination of many factors.
Side note: Just as a personal opinion, I prefer non-instance. I find it more enjoyable; however there are some exceptions (for me) where it can be really fun.
I don't want instancing either, other than on a limited basis where there is a story to tell and it may not work if other players interfere. Or certain bosses if killing them is necessary to access new areas and it just wouldn't be right to be blocked from that content for weeks until you are lucky enough to be in the group that gets credit. Note I am referring to content not saying that bosses that drop desirable gear should be instanced.
But I do disagree with the opinion that instancing destroys the basic concept of a MMO - it merely makes it a *weaker* MMO if taken to extremes.
Some people feel that competition with other players is intrinsic to having a MMO even on pve servers and zewtastic may well be in that camp. They are entitled to that opinion just as I am entitled to emphatically disagree.
On the instances topic, i think they should exist, but only to make progress a bit easier. When it comes down to contested mobs such as dragons and the likes, it should not exist.
If i can take for example, the trials in planes of power EQ. Those should most definately be instanced so another group cannot mess up your progression. But if you need a dragon kill to unlock another raid content, it should be contested and thus not instanced. Other means of instancing i geuss is only over population on regular content. A progression mob should never be instanced (meaning it cannot be 'up' more than once at the same time).
LOL......
I've only played a few MMO's and appealing to multiple play styles is always important unless you're just making a niche game and want to limit your profit
Instances are best for group or raid content, and storylines with a more personal feel to them. Instances do have their place but I do believe in minimizing their usage. Nothing more immersion breaking then trying to have a conversation with an NPC and having so many PCs around them you can brely select them for conversation.
Well, I'm moot on instancing. I can see some limited value for it, but its been overly applied in games like WoW, Blade & Soul, etc. I even have settings which don't even show other players. Bleh!
Anyone who wants to solo in Pantheon, there will be ways to do it at least somewhat. But watch the streams, and tell me how you will solo entry-level dungeons where the good stuff is without a group. Maybe if you are much higher level than the mobs and are careful, but by then the group-players will be lightyears ahead in content.