This could be a long discussion post, so I'll throw the question out first. We all basically seem to agree on what makes an overall game more appealing - and that's content that directs us to play together. So here's another question - what makes those areas so special once we are there? EverQuest in particular had so many amazing dungeons (to the point that many were overlooked), and Vanguard also succeeded in having some very large and enjoyable dungeon encounters. So what does it take to entertain you, and how do you hope Pantheon is built:
So there's the question(s) for discussion -- below are my thoughts.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
What is the most important attribute in a dungeon's design?
My favorite aspect of the EverQuest dungeons was the incredibly unique and diverse setting of so many dungeons. Seriously -- thse days it just seems hard to fathom the complexity and difficulty that inspired our community to sit down and hand draw beauties like these (and then print and compile them into notebooks).
Consider just the lower level options of Blackburrow, RunnyEye, Befallen, and Crushbone. There was great combinations of linear progression through a dungeon and towards large final camps, great examples of using vertical space to create depth to zones that might otherwise have a pretty small footprint, and each area had unique enemies that gave a special feeling to the actual story and "culture" of those early zones. Then think of Najena, Mistmoore, Kedge Keep, Lower Guk, Solusek B, and Cazic Thule. The team did such a fantastic job of mixing outdoor and indoor zones, castles and caves, magic and muscle. There were fantastic mini-settings within each zone, filled with unique mobs. The bar room in Solusek B and the fungus room in Guk were some places that I have really fond memories.
In part because of the diversity, those locations became memorable, even in instances where they were not incredibly complex. High Hold Keep was a dungeon area that had only three or so actual rooms in which fighting would occur. But it was built in a unique way that made what was happening in the dungeon really fun. It wasn't just us adventuring out into a dangerous area - it was the intersection between the humans and those goblins in a border war. Befallen, similarly, was not an area where I spent a very long time leveling, but because a diverse set of spawns were used in later quests, I spent a considerable and enjoyable amount of time hanging around waiting for my nemesis to appear....
What is the most underrated attribute in a dungeon's design?
Environmental danger. In EverQuest this played out most frequently in how the player dealt with navigating the zone and mitigating risks of falling into areas we did not want to be in. The well in Befallen, the hole at the center of Blackburrow's top level, the various bridges and walls separating areas in Guk, and so many other times when you didn't have to worry just about what was in front of you, but also what was above and below. Adventuring outdoors was fun, but adventuring in dungeons required spatial awareness that was way different. False floors, mobs behind walls.... heck, even the natural issue of being underwarter in Kedge Keep.... those were aspects of dungeons that made the experience more intense overall.
What were the biggest drawbacks to dungeons, in your experience?
Time sinks are fine. Slow progression is good. Long term investment is kind of my thing. But dungeon play is inherently more difficult, and with that comes the difficulty of setting up and maintaining groups. Play sessions can collapse quickly upon the exit of a key member of the team. If a dungeon is built around camps, but requires a long linear progression towards it - a lot of time can be wasted if a group falls apart shortly after finally arriving. It's hard for me to figure out a way around it. If I want dungeons to be difficult and complex and diverse, and if the integrity of the environment is a big contributing factor to that, plug and play groups and fast dungeon travel probably isn't going to make me feel very good. If the dungeon is rewarding, and it is built around camps, then getting into one of those locations is not always going to be easy. When travel is difficult and requires time and resources, hopping from dungeon to dungeon to find a location to play may not be an option. To me, this is one of those areas that just reminds me that "If I'm really hoping to play a game for years, then every single night doesn't have to go well." ...have to avoid that desire for instant gratification all the time.
Do you prefer dungeons to be a linear crawl from location to location, or filled with camps?
I am very much a "camps" guy. A linear push through a location tends to imply instancing, unless there is some creative design on the back end of dungeons to prevent entry. But it would not bother me at all if there were some sort of mechanic within the dungeon that promoted mobility and rotation from room to room, rather than a stationary location. But when you combine multiple groups playing at different paces and with different goals, that may not always be possible in an environment. But since my fondest memories are built around specific locations and enemies, camps are ok with me.
How should Pantheon deal with the problem of exiting the deepest depths of dungeons?
If you spend an hour crawling to a specific camp, and then are faced with the prospect of spending an hour crawling out, it might not leave much room for actual game time when you arrive at your final destination. I am adamantly against any mechanic that allows all players to magically wisk themselves back to a safe spot in the dungeon. What I love is a system of well designed skills and class interdependencies that allow players to quickly help one another get to their desired destination. Combinations of group or individual "gate" spells, invisibility, sneaking, mezmerizing, charming, etc. Let players find a way to make it work with the collection of players they have in the group, but don't allow players to negate all the danger naturally and indpendently without having to rely on one another.
Oh, the nostalgia. Anyhow, great post! I would primarily like to respond to the last of the questions, but I would also like to follow your format as shown.
1: Having adventurers naturally come across other adventurers. There were many places in EQ dungeons that I just happened by and said "oh, there are people in there, I wonder what they're killing". It also provided a constant reminder that the world was a big place and you didn't know everyone or everything there. In an MMO like EQ there were a wealth of secrets to be known and seeing other players doing their own thing made you wonder if they had a trick that you could learn about. Now maybe the gaming community as a whole has changed and secrets will be spread quickly, but I feel like as long as players aren't pushed through content (railroad dungeons), then there is room for some of what I yearn for. I feel like in current MMOs that the open world areas have "secret spots" and places where some people go because their friend told them it was a good place to farm x, but railroad design has removed that aspect from the dungeons.
2: The most underrated aspect of a dungeon for me is thematic or visual diversity. I really like dungeons that are split into subsections so you can either tell by the mob type or the visual appearance that you're in different areas of the dungeon. Like a crypt attached to a manor where you'll find skeletons or the like.
3: The biggest drawback to dungeons for me is separated into what type of dungeon it is. For instanced dungeons it is the inability to make choices of where to go (at least real choices). Everyone experiences the same thing with a side-room or two that you can pass by on the way. For open world dungeons it is the need to get players to and from camps.
4: Camps for sure. Having dungeons be linear with increasing difficulty as you move along provides for very consistent and intuitive gameplay, but consistency seems like a downside for world design to me.
5: I love that you brought up exiting and entering dungeons and how that could play into class interdependancy. I would love to see a mechanic where small groups could sneak (to an extent) and large groups could clear their way through. I would love to see a mechanic along the lines of...
The reason I would want a system like this is to encourage a couple of different approaches to getting through dungeons.
That's the kind of thing I would like to see for entering/leaving dungeons. Basically the same as before with EQ where entering/leaving is a cumbersome task, but I would like to see the sneaking side of it is a little more fleshed out. As always, anything that brings different groups of players into contact with each other seems like a win to me.
1. Challenging encounters. This includes trash mobs for me. I hate how in most games lately even solo characters just mow through everything.
2. Agree with OP completely. But I might add just a general feeling of danger around every corner is good too.
3. I cant think of anything that I feel passionate enough one way or the other to mention as a drawback to dungeons. Is love of all things dungeons a con? The best thing I can come up with is that I hate it when mechanics are "too" gimmicky.
4. I like both. Really just depends on the dungeon and how its designed. Idealy, I would say have dungeons support both. But Im not sure this is practical. Might be better to just have every other dungeon designed one way or another. No instances though of course, just fast respawns to push people forward. Dwadle for to long and you get overwhelmed.
5. I mostly agree with what has been said. However, didnt EQ have that Evac spell too. I dont have a problem with a class or 2 having this spell. I know the idea is that it could be used in an emergency, but you could just use it to exit the dungeon too. Besides that I think you should be required to exit a dungeon before you can use any major teleport magic, so that you cant just teleport from the lowest dungeon level to town. Perhaps if that rubs people the wrong way it could teleport to a mid dungeon safe area.
I know you asked questions and I'm not answering them, but I love this post because my #1 complaint about modern MMOs is the lack of thought put into dungeons and "adventures" that you can go on. They are almost all linear runs through dungeon, or in some cases a room with a boss, you beat it and move onto the next room with a boss. I remember very little about any dungeon that I went in since playing EQ and Vanguard, but I remember the ones in EQ and Vanguard very well, to the point where I could probably still navigate them by memory even though it has been years.
1. Each section in the dungeon should bring it's own unique flavor of design and encounter to the table, to seperate a dungeon from a cave with mobs in it.
2. I would go with design to the entrances of dungeons. I think sometimes there's too much of that hole in the ground is the dungeon entrance. I admire an entrance design that gives a bit of excitment when youre running up to it.
3. Lack of an ability to travel through. While you shouldn't be able to go freely wherever you want in a dungeon, I do feel you should be able to get through some sections being invis or somehting like that.
4. Filled with camps definitely. I would like to see groups be able to camp like 3 named spawn locations, mobs regularly respawn. A massive dungeon with 20+ nameds has much more of an RPG feel than a linear instance style.
5. Each class should be able to gate.
What impacted me about open world dungeons and why I came to love the adventure in them, was initially due to how much I got into the game. At first I was very scared of dungeons and dying almost to the point where my char was scared to go anywhere, and nothing too far away. The big turn around was the warrens. Being able to go in there, thinking I was going to die again and get frustrtated, and suddennly seeing it full of people running back and forth, shouting for groups, the pops were so fast that no one was complaining and it was relatively...safe.
What turned it around was when a bunch of people died, they would send someone invised to gather all the corpses and drag them to the zone in- seeing a disembodied group of coupses, mine included, being dragged back through people fighting and those fighting were saying- what is that?! ...it made me laugh and not feel so scared.
When older players would charge through to the deeper ends and we happened to stop by, we were so pleased that they did! they cleared the camps so we could set up in an area and stay a while and not worry about it being to hard because the splits were already done (being cleared- lol) then WE were the ones making that section safe- for others to group near or adventure through.
The other thing was people coming in and asking if such-and-such was seen or killed. usually they only need ONE THING and alot of times they would get or would get tells from people saying they saw it, or were about to kill it and would wait so the person could get their thing, and go.
Karnors castle, usually train city, one day was packed with people. I had never dared venture in past the entrance with a group but to see someone wave at me from a balcony and me scared, and at the same time curious and being able to actualy go inside and see the place and look around without too much fear- I did see one monster down a corridor and my heart lept, only to see them pulled by someone else while I joined the group in another room. I was there all afternoon is was great!. I also remember there was a coveted wrist piece that sometimes dropped that alot of people wanted. Well So many dropped that day, everyone in the castle had them and some only to use as bazaar fodder. If it dropped we would shout and someone would come waltzing in to nab it. good exp, too.
It as fun.
Its basica design elements: Size, Scale and Scope. First off the dungeon needs to be huge. Look at LowerGuk above. It may look huge, spanning some 1700 by 1800, but the actual squarefootage of the place is quite small. Compare it to a dungeon like Kaesor and The Hole and you can see a size far more adequate. Kaesora's failing was having very little content within it compared to its size. Scope is important because the dungeon needs to reflect the inhabitants. SolA, RunnyEye were both homes to goblins, yet Ogres had no problems fitting through any of their doorways. SolA should have required every other than Dwarves and Gnomes to have Shrink cast upon them. The place should have felt far more claustrophobic. Scope is how far that dungeon grows in difficulty the further you progress. Too rapid of a rise is just as bad as one where there is no growth through the dungeon, no reward for that extra few levels that no let you get to a whole new area you've heard so much about.
Sound, specifically how far sound travels. Dungeons should be a cacophony of sounds and echoes. Ever been spelunking? Sounds echo for a long time. Dungeons should reflect that echoing nature of stone tunnels so that you can hear much further than you can even see.
Dungeons significantly lacked equality in loot amongst the various classes. Some classes could get 'game changing' loot from dungeons while other classes only ever saw mediocre increases. LowerGuk had FBSS, one of (if not the) most desirable group-obtainable loot item in the game at the time. 21% haste made a huge difference to melee classes. Did casters see such an increase in power from a single item? Rarely would every class see an item of equivalent power come out of a single dungeon. Someone (usually melee) always came out ahead. This has been repeated commonly in raid level content as well.
I'm in the 'camping' side so far as the nature of the dungeon (camping vs. crawling) being encouraged by the design. Dungeons that have lots of dead-ends where some named mob spawns isn't conducive to roaming. What it does do is make people try everything they can to control more and more camps from 1 spot. Design a dungeon where movement around is limited to certain directions, having points of no return and numerous named have multiple placeholders. Charasis was good for continually moving.
This is where design comes into play. Why should the exit of a dungeon be the same as the entrance? Why can't there be a loop back up to the entrance ala Kaesora? Lets take a hint from the movies where we see escapes via sewage or underground waterways or even ventilation shafts, basically something where you'll need a few hits of Shrink so you can fit into the tunnel and even then its a slow crouching shuffle to get out. The key thing to remember is that it must be impossible to go through that route backwards.
Not fantastically considered... but here goes:
1. Most important design aspect:
Assymetric layout - both for mob levels and dungeon layout
Dungeons should comprise a series of interconnected 'pockets' of differring mob camps. Some camp 'fringes' should overlap others, including wanderers that may actually be KOS to each other - or (as in Guk differ Living/Undead for eg.) differ in nature (and hence methods for defending against them. Within certain level constraints it is also good to place these mob camps in varying geographcal locations - not 'evenly spaced'. These variations in mob density will naturally allow the players to develop emergent methods for dealing with the dungeon. It is absolutely not needed to 'pre-package' the dungeon with expectations of linear travel through it. Indeed, this is counterproductive, generating a 'theme-park' and not a dungeon.
PS To the DEVs: Do NOT try to 'model' the random spread of spawns manually - you would do better by throwing a handfull of D6 and D8 dice across the dungeon map and using the numbers/positions revealed to dictate spawn locations and strength/type. De Moivre, Simeon-Denis Poisson and, ultimately Bortkiewicz showed that the Law of Big numbers supports clusters. Happily, serial killers and burglars do not understand the Poisson distribution either!
2. Most most underrated attribute:
Ambiance
Each dungeon should have a 'flavour'. All should feel 'worrying', perhaps even downright scary. It is not about the 'toughness' of the mobs inside. It is about blind corners, pitfalls, creaks and groans .... the misaligned walls and ceilings that generate a feeling of clautrophobia. Even to the dripping of water into a stangnat pool at a dead end in a mine tunnel. ALl these things add to the overall 'feel' of the dungeon, and they comprise an assault on all your senses. Varying light levels, noises and even colour palettes all accent this 'feel'.
Sol A and B 'felt' hot and stifling. Guk 'felt' dim and dank.
3. Biggest drawbacks
Dungeons can be less tolerant of variations in player density. Too many or too few can cause problems.
4. Linear vs Camps
I'm in the 'camps' camp. Can I say that?
Linear = Theme Park = Conveyer belt = Super Mario side scroller.
5. Exiting the deepest depths
The simplest solution to this 'problem' can be to harness the use of zones. Consider Sol A and Sol B which had multiple points of entry/exit. Even though some of these 'exits' were actually paths into another dungeon, they provided a potentially safe area. Not guaranteed safe, but perhaps clearable for long enough to camp out and have a chance to return without getting instantly killed before you either gated, invised, or otherwise extricated yourself.
If dungeons have multiple zones, or entry points, these can substitute for a 'safe space' where players arrive to LFG, camp out etc.
On the other hand, Karnors Central Train Station was awesome at times!
One thing I think is super important to me, not mentioned often, are mobs that are not tethered together. Each mob positioned and behaving independently of one another. Mix in a good mix of wandering mobs, now you have a lively, strategic type situation where a good puller or pacifier makes sense, as well as knowledge on where to stage or set-up. Positioning when you fight and move along the way make it super fun and keeps you on your toes.
Another thing needing discussion are the spawn rates. To me, it needs to be a rate that requires the group to pace correctly, otherwise you can get overwhelmed or surprised by respawns which can cause difficulties to the group.
EQ1 had this managed very well on both of these topics.
Lastly, great dungeons to me have multiple variations to it... Elevation changes, narrow areas, wide open areas, water, ladders, drops, traps, unique camps or drops... I love to concept of aquiring special keys or magic items to access extra areas of a dungeon. Gives you something else to work on within a dungeon. I would like to see rare mobs that are needed for quest drops to be more class specific so that a single camp does not feel like it is camped 24 / 7.
First, it's good to see you posting and active again Hannar. And.. good questions :).
1. What is the most important attribute in a dungeon's design?
Atmosphere. Forced first person helped this a lot, and the fact that there were no maps, but the sense that the dungeon is huge, every corner could mean your death, and that the dungeons "felt" real. The size of the dungeon never really mattered either as a zone as large as Gukbottom as you mentioned had the same "feel," or sense of danger as did Unrest of Befallen which were much smaller.
2. What is the most underrated attribute in a dungeon's design?
Unique mobs, secret passages, locked doors, varied mob level ranges, or the unknown. Enough depth to the dungeon to keep it fresh. Enough rarity in the dungeon that it doesn't feel like a treadmill. Enough of a level gab between the entry mobs and ending mobs that you feel like you've accomplished a huge feat from "conquering" the dungeon.
3. What were the biggest drawbacks to dungeons, in your experience?
The newer designed linear dungeons (crawls versus camps). Especially when they use tokens for everyone to have a participation ribbon and obtain gear.
4. Do you prefer dungeons to be a linear crawl from location to location, or filled with camps?
See #3. I prefer camps. The "camping" experience is overall much more social and fosters a better community. However, I get that people are on more time constraints today than when I played EQ in 1999 (however, there are still younger gamers also). To combat that problem versus creating linear dungeon runs, I'd recommend just having multiple zone out, with different requirements possibly to access them. Whether that be level, keys, meeting specific dungeon requirements, rogues, spells, etc.
5. How should Pantheon deal with the problem of exiting the deepest depths of dungeons?
See #4. In addition to your points on class interpendency with gate, translocate, call of the hero, etc.
How should Pantheon deal with the problem of exiting the deepest depths of dungeons?
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with every class having a gate spell, a bit like a hearthstone from WoW. I do not think however that the location that this gate takes you should be able to be changed, it should just take you to your races major city. A hefty cooldown is a must, 4 hours +, and a long channel, 30s or so would do. I don't think this would be too much of a concession. I don't even mind if this said item is quested for, maybe an heirloom type thing. After all, we would appreciate it much more if we had to work for it first.
Rallyd said:How should Pantheon deal with the problem of exiting the deepest depths of dungeons?
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with every class having a gate spell, a bit like a hearthstone from WoW. I do not think however that the location that this gate takes you should be able to be changed, it should just take you to your races major city. A hefty cooldown is a must, 4 hours +, and a long channel, 30s or so would do. I don't think this would be too much of a concession. I don't even mind if this said item is quested for, maybe an heirloom type thing. After all, we would appreciate it much more if we had to work for it first.
I guess I wouldnt mind it as much if you couldnt get it till lvl 20 or something.. but, I would rather non magical folks have to find someone to cast an odessey-type spell on them.(For non EQ players that was a spell cast by a cleric that sent you to your bind spot. required an odessey stone as a reagent.)
What is the most important attribute in a dungeon's design?
See Guk above. Ambiance/Theme. Also, there needs to be an understanding that even man made structures are rarely symetrical, particularly if added to over time. The place should look like it could actually exist in it's current state. Too many dungeons look like someone cut and pasted a few rooms all in a row along a single corridor.
What is the most underrated attribute in a dungeon's design?
Twists and turns. Splits in the road. Do you want to go right, left, or forward?
What were the biggest drawbacks to dungeons, in your experience?
Typically, even a group of three is unable to do much, if any of the content. Need a full group. Why? I understand not being able to solo, but why make it require a full group always.
Do you prefer dungeons to be a linear crawl from location to location, or filled with camps?
Camps, with many different pathways. Although not every pathway should lead to something, there should be good reason to explore them all, or the vast majority of them.
How should Pantheon deal with the problem of exiting the deepest depths of dungeons?
Many different ways, randomly. Some should have multiple entrances/exits. Some a teleporter. Some should require you to fight back. This should very much be determined by the dungeon design and theme. Not neccesarily convenience. That said, a few conveniences are not bad if used sparingly. Getting out should be a function of the what would make sense in the world, not what makes it easy, or even hard for that matter. Having an exit 2/3 of the way through might help. An idea: A cliff you could drop off of to leave the dungeon. But you better have flight or safe fall.
1. ZERO SAFE SPOTS SAVE ZONE IN.
2. ZERO SAFE SPOTS SAVE ZONE IN.
3. Old school is was geting people to the group if you were in deep. ERven if they knew the way most of the time someone or something would see them and either cause a train or need to be dragged down.
4. Camps no question make us work for it. Look around every corner check all the walls a linear zone is stale.
5. Tricky question depending on class. Casters should be able to come and go via gate or port spells as they please (imo) fighter classes should be able to exit via self port long cooldown or get an invs from a group member and hope you dont run into see invs mobs. That being said if they world is anything like the size of other mmos most people wont be running back to their starting city every few hours. Make sure you bring bag space =). Providing the Dire Lord has FD ill just flop out myself.
BTW, Excellent post sir +1
Nimryl said:2. What is the most underrated attribute in a dungeon's design?
Truthfully? The smaller details. In most mmo's and in most other forms of dungeons bar PnP ones.. the smaller details are always forgotten.
When you've played a PnP game.. you know that what really makes an dungeon/area and what really gets your attention are the smaller details.. yet for some reason when this is translated.. most of the small details are left behind for a more simplistic/basic styled gameplay.
Now this guy gets it. I agree with every point he made fully, but..
The details are a big deal for me. Caved in roofs, broken doors, locked doors, false floors, old weapons and bones on the ground, good ol' EQ meat-chains hanging from the ceiling, abandoned thrones, etc. Anything possible to set an atmosphere or help tell a story. Crypts should not be clean as if someone just swept it up the night before. Broken sarcophagi, tree roots growing through the ceiling, maybe a room full of spiders that have set up a home. DETAAAIIIILLSS
Kilaen said:Nimryl said:2. What is the most underrated attribute in a dungeon's design?
Truthfully? The smaller details. In most mmo's and in most other forms of dungeons bar PnP ones.. the smaller details are always forgotten.
When you've played a PnP game.. you know that what really makes an dungeon/area and what really gets your attention are the smaller details.. yet for some reason when this is translated.. most of the small details are left behind for a more simplistic/basic styled gameplay.Now this guy gets it. I agree with every point he made fully, but..
The details are a big deal for me. Caved in roofs, broken doors, locked doors, false floors, old weapons and bones on the ground, good ol' EQ meat-chains hanging from the ceiling, abandoned thrones, etc. Anything possible to set an atmosphere or help tell a story. Crypts should not be clean as if someone just swept it up the night before. Broken sarcophagi, tree roots growing through the ceiling, maybe a room full of spiders that have set up a home. DETAAAIIIILLSS
In the industry, we call this "environmental narrative." Non-interactable objects or scenes that just kinda make you go "hmm... I wonder what happened here." Like maybe a table flipped on its side and papers strewn about. Their sheer presence in a world can cause your mind to piece together a part of the story. I agree this is definitely something that is lacking in most games (or it's too easy to just run right by it) and makes a big difference. Most dev teams assume players won't notice this sort of thing and therefore it's not worth taking the time to create these details. But whether a player consciously realizes it or not, it really can make or break an area.
"In the industry, we call this "environmental narrative." Non-interactable objects or scenes that just kinda make you go "hmm... I wonder what happened here." Like maybe a table flipped on its side and papers strewn about. Their sheer presence in a world can cause your mind to piece together a part of the story. I agree this is definitely something that is lacking in most games (or it's too easy to just run right by it) and makes a big difference. Most dev teams assume players won't notice this sort of thing and therefore it's not worth taking the time to create these details. But whether a player consciously realizes it or not, it really can make or break an area."
I can't speak for everyone. But I certainly notice the smaller details much much more in a dangerous situation (dungeon); why? because I look for clues on whats up a head or what type of situation I'm dealing with to cope with the unknown.. so that I can be prepared just like in PnP DnD. So blood splatters on the floor = time to get protection spells up.. etc. I mean that's a pretty obvious one. Maybe it's just me.. but I think certainly it gets ignored/put on the side. One little detail can make all the difference between atmosphere, strategy and preparation.
(+It applies to characters/enemies too. Seems to be more common tho on these.)
For me and mine, static dungeons and static loot are.. well.. they have had their day and I don't see the value anymore, outside of lore/story related scenes.
So, specifically, my answers to these questions are biased by a distaste for not using dynamically generated / procedurally generated dungeons for procedurally generated and personalized content.
1) It should be dynamic/procedural.
2) It should be dynamic/procedural.
3) That after the first time through, it's predictable.
4) I prefer them to be different each time I enter them, unless it is a lore/story scene.
5) Put a teleporter out at the bottom that only activates after a/the goal has been achieved. There's a place for tedium and a place for convenience. Not placing an exit at the end also seriously limits dungeon design, removing meaningful decisions and one-way paths.
Some of these features are expected in 2017+. Origin, for example, is an ability granted to every character over level 5, today, in Everquest. It allows any player to return to their point of origin (home city/guild) every 15 minutes. Did this feature break the game? No. Worst case, at the end of a raid, dungeon, or expedition, everyone simply Origin's out. Done.
I'm aware that there is a small demographic who wants no instanced competetive dungeons where a naked level 1 wood elf could walk from one end to the other because everyone has the spawn timers timed to the millisecond, just like it was in EQ1 before the first expansion. Me? Not so much. Those days were not fun, they were a trial to be endured and were only tolerated due to so few choices on the market at the time.
In short, in my opinion, an LDON style gear and dungeons should be what pantheon uses, to start. Except instead of being 4 or 5 static dungeons in an area, they should actually be procedural. There are procedural dungeon generation scripts in the Unity store right now, and have been for more than 5 years. It's not bleeding edge tech. Many games feature seed based dungeon generation, and have for years.
If it is a design goal for Pantheon that players are able to find loot in the environment, such as a scrap of parchment leading to a hidden door/entrance, content beyond which is then created for that group or raid and then consumed, I think that would be a great feature. So far, what's been demonstrated is a completely static design, and that is a lost opportunity, in my opinion.
It's really hard to name just one but I think like you mentioned having diversity and going hand in hand with that is open world design. The moden MMO dungeon design is just lacking. The linear nature of dungeons is just not satsifying. Even in a game like ESO that had high quality, story driven dungeons that were enjoyable..the replayability of them dropped off significantly each time you did them and the lack of other playerse made them feel too static and stale over time. They just become too predictable.
Danger. I have been playing EQ again on P99 for a while now while waiting for Pantheon and it's amazing how the sense of danger in EQ dungeons persists even this many years later. This danger comes from multiple game designs including how death works with losing your items on your corpse, loss of XP, how binding/spawn points work, open dungeons and having to interact with other potentially wreckless groups, trains, large dungeons that get quite inaccessible the farther you get in etc..
Like others have said..time. Part of what makes a dungeon good is also what makes it bad. The time involved with putting a group together and fighting into a spot and fighting out is time consuming and many don't have that sort of time. I think there could be some interesting ideas to deal with this. One would be multiple dungeon access points. Maybe one way drop in points that would allow you to bypass some parts of a dungeon. Another idea might be some relatively safe spots within dungeons where people could camp out so they could continue their adventure the following day and bypass some of the setup time. Lguk had the safe hall for example. I don't think that was a design choice but it was discovered by players and used in that way. Designers could expand on that idea and have a couple of these type spots sprinkled throughout dungeons where players could log on and off, form groups, find a port or escort out of dungeon, find replacements for group members that have to leave etc..
Camps without a doubt. The only linear type crawl that makes sense to me is an instance that is designed to push along a particular story narrative. I don't have a problem with that but those should be considered one-off type dungeons that are not meant to be repeated. True adventuring dungeons should be camp oriented.
See my other comment on drawbacks and time.
Ashvaild said: "I'm aware that there is a small demographic who wants no instanced competetive dungeons where a naked level 1 wood elf could walk from one end to the other because everyone has the spawn timers timed to the millisecond, just like it was in EQ1 before the first expansion. Me? Not so much. Those days were not fun, they were a trial to be endured and were only tolerated due to so few choices on the market at the time." I feel like this "small" demographic is what drives pantheon. Also, if lower guk changed everytime you entered it, it wouldve been a total nightmare
Agreed on both points.
There is significant amount of satisfaction gained when you feel like you have mastered a difficult dungeon and know it like the back of your hand. For me, that was Unrest. I'm not saying every single moment should be scripted and predictable. You can still have moments of not knowing what's around the corner in the zone that you've already explored before. In an MMO, your group comp or the other random players sharing the zone with you can make each experience quite unique. Making the mobs themselves a little more intelligent or less predictable will also help. Procedural generation is NOT the answer. As usual, the best solution lies somewhere between the two extremes. Procedural generation makes literally no sense in this setting. It was said that the only static things should be zones that are tied into lore. I'm pretty sure everyone is expecting every single zone to be tied into the lore one way or another. The whole point of an MMO is to have a static world. When I go home, I don't expect there to be doors and walls in new places! Everything should be more or less the way I left it unless there's a really good explanation for why it wouldn't be. So keep the dungeon walls, floors, and ceilings the same - maybe just make the actual mobs within it a little less scripted. This is basically the same argument as the "Why Raid Bosses are Only Fun Once" thread. You'd have to have an extremely short attention span to get bored after one run-through. Pantheon is geared toward an audience that likes a good amount of grind. That's just how it is. Little surprises here and there can keep it plenty interesting but those will probably happen naturally in a community-oriented game. But don't change the world just for the sake of change.
Procedurally generated, personalized dungeons would not feel like a part of the world and introduces instancing. Perhaps, at least, have dynamic spawn timers with the different types of mobs found within said dungeon migrating to different areas. The actual dungeon itself should not change... it's a part of the world. Frogs are not going to reconstruct Guk every time someone leaves..
Bazgrim said:There is significant amount of satisfaction gained when you feel like you have mastered a difficult dungeon and know it like the back of your hand. For me, that was Unrest. I'm not saying every single moment should be scripted and predictable. You can still have moments of not knowing what's around the corner in the zone that you've already explored before. In an MMO, your group comp or the other random players sharing the zone with you can make each experience quite unique. Making the mobs themselves a little more intelligent or less predictable will also help. Procedural generation is NOT the answer. As usual, the best solution lies somewhere between the two extremes. Procedural generation makes literally no sense in this setting. It was said that the only static things should be zones that are tied into lore. I'm pretty sure everyone is expecting every single zone to be tied into the lore one way or another. The whole point of an MMO is to have a static world. When I go home, I don't expect there to be doors and walls in new places! Everything should be more or less the way I left it unless there's a really good explanation for why it wouldn't be. So keep the dungeon walls, floors, and ceilings the same - maybe just make the actual mobs within it a little less scripted. This is basically the same argument as the "Why Raid Bosses are Only Fun Once" thread. You'd have to have an extremely short attention span to get bored after one run-through. Pantheon is geared toward an audience that likes a good amount of grind. That's just how it is. Little surprises here and there can keep it plenty interesting but those will probably happen naturally in a community-oriented game. But don't change the world just for the sake of change.
Preach!
I am pretty set against procedurally generated content because, in my experience, it has been done so poorly in the past and is very difficult to retain some of the smaller, meaningful and intentional personal touches that can come along with having an actual designer and artist control all aspects of content creation. I understand the desire to have content vary to prevent an area from becoming stale, but I think it's possible to have variety through diverse combat and group dynamics. I also value learning a dungeon and knowledge of an encounter as positive player interactions with the game world and community -- so I'm less likely to feel like an area has gotten stale.