Vanguard: Making the game as they go?

[Utnayan]

Originally Posted by slitz

Now swallow the pride and don't respond to this again since you will just look more foolish if you actually try convince me why having a 5 million playerbase is better than a 300k for my specific none instanced dungeoun.

Jesus do the math. EQ at 300k had camping, lists, LFG's, people not being able to find groups, and damn near all the content was jammed packed from Unrest to Sebilis. Don't come in here and read into shit. I said that the population of a game will have an impact on what gets camped - that's common sense fuckhole. Less people with static content means less is being used. Welcome to 1989 elementary school addition. With EQ2 there is TONS of content without nearly the amount of players to fill it. Wallah - a lot of static content will not be contested as a result.

While you think none instance dungeouns is the way to go, I believe the oposite. It has nothing to do with the content in the dungeoun or the cool scripts that are easier to control in instances, it's all about the immersiveness to me.

What immersiveness? No scripting? Camping? Going LFG for hours? Lack of content available per the population? Lag? Certain dungeons getting priority over others which causes more content traffic jams?

[Soygen]

Originally Posted by Rayne

Here? Here that observation is subjective, perhaps. On Vanguard's official forums, its religion. A religion that Brad simply refuses to put in check when his community members don thier flame retardent suits.

Most of what Utnayan is posting currently, is actual "tester observation". And like it or not, a vast majority of whats been stated in the past few weeks has been pretty consistant. The most important being, Vanguard ISN'T much "fun". So little in fact, that testers can't be assed up to even log in to test.

And in the context of that observation alone, anyone who can't see it isn't just missing the forest, they're missing half the planet. Regardless of whether they're being told by Utnayan, NDA breakers, or anyone else.

Again, your keyboard is working great, but the lack of comprehension(of the point I apparently can't make) on your part inclines me to post. Utnayan is posting here. We are all posting here. I don't care what people on VG's board are doing. When you talk about Utnayan posting and people not "getting it", why would I assume you're talking about the idiots on the VG forum? The fact of the matter is people with a head on their shoulder(and who are on this fucking forum - sorry, but I guess I have to specify) fucking get it. There is absolutely nothing new or enlightening on this thread at all.

[Etadanik]

To the naysayers I indicated will surely show up: please, spare me the "oh it's all nostalgia" bullshit. I think I am aware of what I want to play without you telling me what I really want to play, so stfu about that line of argument. I'm aware that reactions to the EQ era are relatively mixed on this board, but then that's the case for every game, so it's hardly a good argument for why EQ ideas are good/bad.

Moreover, if you're going to argue that "THE MASSES" hate the zone hub idea, fine, but last I checked WoW outdoor zones were all zone hubs and WoW LFG'ing for an instance is just as hard, if not moreso, than EQ LFG for a dungeon - so where's your proof otherwise? The same tired arguments about how camping is boring won't sway me because farming is just as boring, if not more so, and yet plenty of people engage in just that (and are forced to engage in just that to progress in WoW). Perhaps it's time you stopped hiding behind the "well 6.5 million players play WoW" theorycrafting on just why people play WoW.

Lastly, since my argument was meant to concoct an alternative to the whole Quest-based advancement system, I still have yet to see anyone come up with a reason why quests are the perfect model from a development and "fun factor" point of view. It's easy to talk about the negatives of a system, but *all* systems have negatives. Quest systems are hampered by extraneous deveopment times for what are essentially limited rewards (since it's simply a wrapper around the world content, which the player must still interact with in order to complete the quest), do not lead to emergent content, are strictly linear, leads by the hand (at least in WoW's implementation), and have little replayability (since once you've done a quest, it's generally no longer doable).

The zone hub approach, on the other hand, have positives in all of these aspects (zone hub deveopment is world development, zone hubs lead to emergent content, zone hubs do not lead by the hand, and have alot of replayability). It has negatives in other aspects, which have been reiterated in this thread, but most of them are fixable and some are irrelevant. For example, the claim that camping is boring I've already dealt with - farming/grinding is just as boring, and I'd much rather camp a named mob than hope for a 0.01% world epic drop. The claim that dungeon crawling is more fun is, OTOH, irrelevant since this argument doesn't even have to do with instancing vs non-instancing. You could easily offer both instanced dungeons and non-instanced zone hubs in the same game. WoW tries to do this, to an extent, with outdoor zones - but its ability to reify this goal is hampered by a variety of factors such as the constant movements required by questing.

That, in some sense, is the heart of this argument - whether the kind of gameplay attributed to WoW's questing system should really be the future of MMOs as opposed ot zone hubbing. My stance is clear: there is room for both approaches. This isn't about dungeon crawling vs. camping. Nor soloing vs. grouping. This is not another EQ vs. WoW argument where you flaunt the whole "CASUAL GAMERS LIKE SOLOING LOL!1Z11" to defeat your opponents. I'm not even going to respond to people who equate zone hubbing with tedium because if your brain cannot conceive of the differences between the two then it's obviously not worth my time to debate you.

Now, do continue.

[Rayne]

Originally Posted by Eomer

I'm honestly curious, because I really don't see how people outside of beta can make an objective judgement on whether or not expectations have been handled well or not.

Its "expected" to be "fun". If it were, a fuckton more testers would actually be "in game". What will you tell me now? Its beta? Its not "supposed" to be fun?

How about "without all the needless timesinks and tedium"? Tell me. When does that part finally kick in? Rogues stealing glass bits to make poison vials? Kill level 1 shit until you ding 2, then move 50 yards and kill level 2 shit until you ding 3? Move 50 more for the level 3 shit? Spend hours or more, collect a bunch of different shit, to get some piece of shit reward to sell to a vendor, cause the shit you already have is better? Travelling 30 minutes to a dungeon for a group that'll likely break up as soon as a needed class' quest piece drops? Getting dropped like a bad habit by a horde of mobs that "spots" you from 30 meters away? Then get repeatedly gang raped trying to get my corpse back? Wheres the fucking FUN part man?

Instead of asking me "whats missing", you should be telling everyone "whats fun". Because I haven't seen a single fuckin' post come from that beta to convince me that theres ANY to be had. Every post that attempts to refute the negatives is the same old bullshit. "Its beta, you're supposed to be testing, you're not supposed to be having fun".

Bullshit. It isn't about "specific features" missing. Its about telling me, the potential customer, "what the fun and interesting parts are". Whats there to "compel me" to play your game. Don't blow some "core gamer" bullshit up my ass, telling me that if I liked EQ, or some other early games, i'll probably like Vanguard. Give me REAL EXAMPLES of where the fun lies. Instead of that, all I hear is "more on that later", or its "sekret sauce" type stuff. Well fuck that Brad. After 4+ years, the "fun" parts should be speaking VOLUMES about why I should be looking forward to this game.

[slitz]

Originally Posted by Utnayan

With EQ2 there is TONS of content without nearly the amount of players to fill it. Wallah - a lot of static content will not be contested as a result.

Or maybe it depends on how they spread out their playerbase over X amount of servers Einstein?

What immersiveness? No scripting? Camping? Going LFG for hours? Lack of content available per the population? Lag? Certain dungeons getting priority over others which causes more content traffic jams?

Here you go again, trying to convince me that the way you prefer is the better one. It feels like I'm doing some kind of charity for retards here so I'm throwing in the towel.

[Rayne]

Originally Posted by Soygen

Again, your keyboard is working great, but the lack of comprehension(of the point I apparently can't make) on your part inclines me to post. Utnayan is posting here. We are all posting here. I don't care what people on VG's board are doing. When you talk about Utnayan posting and people not "getting it", why would I assume you're talking about the idiots on the VG forum? The fact of the matter is people with a head on their shoulder(and who are on this fucking forum - sorry, but I guess I have to specify) fucking get it. There is absolutely nothing new or enlightening on this thread at all.

Ok. What part of "I don't give a shit if you like Utnayan or not" didn't you understand?

I don't "need" to "get" anything about Utnayan. He's of no concern to me. What I am concerned with, is the info hes relaying from beta testers. Or are you trying to say that what he getting from beta testers doesn't matter, because you and others don't like him?

[Soygen]

Originally Posted by Rayne

Ok. What part of "I don't give a shit if you like Utnayan or not" didn't you understand?

I don't "need" to "get" anything about Utnayan. He's of no concern to me. What I am concerned with, is the info hes relaying from beta testers. Or are you trying to say that what he getting from beta testers doesn't matter, because you and others don't like him?

Again, my point is the fucking info he is relaying is the same tired shit we've been hearing for months. My point has nothing to do with Utnayan, but the fact that the shit he keeps talking is going nowhere. I don't like nor dislike Utnayan. I think he is a bit obesessed with something I just can't understand someone being this obsessed with, but that's neither here nor there.

You made a post(the first one I quoted from you on this thread), basically saying that all the people arguing with Ut were just in denial of the truth he was espousing. I responded that was fucking retarded to say that about the people on this forum. Then you responded that while that may be true, it wasn't true on the VG forums. HUH?! Like I said, we aren't on the VG forums.

Let's just agree to disagree, as I don't even fucking know what we're talking about any more.

[Utnayan]

Originally Posted by slitz

Or maybe it depends on how they spread out their playerbase over X amount of servers Einstein?

Ok you tell me when they are going to hold the server itself to the amount of content finished in this century. They are going to jam as many people as they can on the servers to save money on the hardware. You are going to average 2.5-3k per server on a top filled server architecture. I said all along to have that content you need lots of it, across all levels, without favoring one dungeon over another for reward schemes, and it would work. That still doesn't address ANY of the other issues. Scriped events, deeper meaning to the dungeon, playability, replayability, questing, population problems that will still pop up on those dungeons in a static sense, and lag.

Here you go again, trying to convince me that the way you prefer is the better one. It feels like I'm doing some kind of charity for retards here so I'm throwing in the towel.

No. I am trying to get you to name off some points about WHY you think static content is better when faced with the negatives and which outweigh which.

[slitz]

Originally Posted by Utnayan

No. I am trying to get you to name off some points about WHY you think static content is better when faced with the negatives and which outweigh which.

Say that from the start then next time.
In theory, instanced dungeouns look a lot better on paper than none instanced dungeouns imo.

You have the ability to script different encounters in a way that it would be impossible to put them out in a none restricted enviroment (a none instanced dungeoun) and call it a success. It only works in a instanced dungeoun since you have too many variables to work around with that you can't control in the normal world. Obviously, this is a major drawback on none instanced dungeouns.

Secondly, you don't have to compete with other people for bossX (some see this as a drawback others don't, I see it as a big plus).

Thirdly, you have everything under control from a developer perspective. Instead of optimizing a dungeoun and not knowing how many people will be visible on the screen at the same time, you remove all those problems since most people that will be in the average group dungeoun is 5 people. Thus optimizations are a lot easier.
There are tons of benefits for using none instanced dungeouns and these are only three of them.

So what's the benefits for none instanced content?
I explained it before, to me it's immersiveness, instanced dungeouns doesn't give me the same immersiveness as a none instanced dungeoun.
I can't pinpoint it down to atom level so that's pretty much the best answer I can give you, but whatever it is, it sure beats the hell out of all the benefits instanced dungeouns have in theory over none instanced dungeouns (for me at least).
I am however not saying that a game should be completly none instanced, like I said before I think EQ2 took a good approach to have some critical parts of dungeouns instanced.

[frott]

Originally Posted by Utnayan

What the hell were they trying to "focus test"? CS reps being able to ban people? That doesn't make any sense.

What non-fan / determined people might think of the game at that point? Looks like they logged on, made fun of the game, and left.

[Utnayan]

Originally Posted by slitz

Say that from the start then next time.

Secondly, you don't have to compete with other people for bossX (some see this as a drawback others don't, I see it as a big plus).

How do you see not getting the monster you want to kill and getting ran over by another group, a plus? Because it adds competition?

I am however not saying that a game should be completly none instanced, like I said before I think EQ2 took a good approach to have some critical parts of dungeouns instanced.

Problem is, how many people are actually going into those areas? In your opinion, what is your favorite dungeon in EQ2, and is it instanced? What is your favorite storyline in EQ2 and is it instanced? Do you feel like you are making an impact on a non instanced dungeon?

I will be the first one to come in here and tell you I am all for non instanced content when the following can occur:

1> There is enough content designed in manners that will allow players to have something to do anytime they want without having to wait in line.

2> There are dynamic impacts that can be made and players can leave a mark on the world. Right now the only way to give the player that impression is to instance it and script it. The best example I can think of was the Coldain Ring Quest in EQ. That is the perfect way to handle it. Alternate zone files. But take it a step further and create alternate zone trees - which can be used to continually develop a world on the fly for that particular zone given player impacts.

But the problem is, no one wants to put the money and effort into that.

[Utnayan]

Originally Posted by frott

What non-fan / determined people might think of the game at that point? Looks like they logged on, made fun of the game, and left.

If MS was trying to get a non biased view of it, because they were fearful of losing more money or another AC2, it looks ,like it served their purpose. MS obviously wanted more finished with the game at the point they told those people to go in. I am not saying I agree with it - I think they should have waited until beta 2 to do something like that - but I doubt they just hired people to log in the game, make fun of it, and bolt.

[Rayne]

Originally Posted by slitz

some critical parts of dungeouns instanced.

This part makes a lot of sense to me. Especially when it comes to dungeons that hold needed items such as class specific armor parts, or quest drops. Theres really nothing to stop them from creating non-instanced dungeons, with instanced "branching" inside of them.

Imagine the front of Blackrock Spire. But much much larger. With different paths branching to different instances in deeper parts of the dungeon, instead of right in the beginning. One branch would take you to an instance with Rend, and the arena encounter. Another to the Beast. Another to Drakk, etc. Kind of like finding the entrance to BWL thats inside UBRS. Non-instanced respawning dungeons, that lead to instanced boss quest encounters to avoid the waiting for the main event. You have to work your way to it, but once you do, its all yours.

The respawning "front" area holds quest items, but with drops being a bit more "rare". Instanced sections would drop quest items at a higher rate to reward the group for thier effort to get to them.

[Zorlac]

Originally Posted by slitz

to me it's immersiveness, instanced dungeouns doesn't give me the same immersiveness as a none instanced dungeoun..

For you, I don't think the word "immersive" means what you think it means. How can you have immersive dungeon when retards train you? When all you see is general chat being spammed by morons with retarded character names? How can you claim immersive a non instanced dungeon where everyone and their mother is sitting on their asses in a corner waiting for some mobs to "mysteriously" appear? How can you have immersive dungeons where all mobs have a life expectancy of 10 seconds, you got lists for camp groups, and you can pretty much walk to the Ghoul Lord all the way from zoneout without seing a fucking mob alive?

Do you want to tell us that camping the shroom king in Sebilis is more immersive than doing the Stratholme 45 minute quest?

I am not saying WoW or other instanced crap is God's gift to humanity for immersive content, infact I don't beleive MMOG are immersive, but saying that good old overcamped Sebilis is immersive is kinda shortsighted IMO. It's the same as saying that McDonald's hamburgers have great nutritional value. It's true, when you compare them to feces or when someone is completely delusional.

[frott]

Originally Posted by Utnayan

If MS was trying to get a non biased view of it, because they were fearful of losing more money or another AC2, it looks ,like it served their purpose. MS obviously wanted more finished with the game at the point they told those people to go in. I am not saying I agree with it - I think they should have waited until beta 2 to do something like that - but I doubt they just hired people to log in the game, make fun of it, and bolt.

Oh yeah, nothing like that - any focus group at that point of dev, in my experience, is a death knell. They unleashed unbiased folks and saw what they thought, they didn't specifically hire or command them to do anything so much as gathered their feedback and opinions at that point.

I remember looking at the WoW leaked alpha where you ran around as a troll in an unpopulated world and thought "Holy God this is going to be great." No spells. No anything except a big, seamless world. Frankly, if that sort of thing isn't clicking by this phase of dev with a game it is pretty obvious where it is headed.

EQ2, which I had a ton of problems with in beta, still had massive amounts of potential... what was unexpected was that they'd rework things so dramatically. Now I'm sure we differ in opinions as to why such radical changes went through (desperation?), there is nothing that I've witnessed first hand that smacks of "Oh, they'll probably make it better!" with VG because there's that core to the game that is pretty much unchangable... outside of it no longer resembling what it is now.

If there is supposed to be something that I'm supposed to be excited about with VG, the world needs a favor right now and it is some sort of clue as to what that might be.