Munk said:It seems to me that people often associate time-sink with being hardcore and challenging. I'd much rather play a game that is hardcore because it requires skill, coordination, and teamwork. I'm all for old-school combat that keeps my on my toes and I really love the slower leveling pace that games like EQ and even D&D bring. However if a game is artifically increasing challenge by adding excessive time-sinks, thats not fun. This tends to be how I decide for or against any game system.
Bring on a large world that requires travelling without ports. But it better be fun running across the world. /Auto Follow for 30 minutes while I watch the office is not fun and is not challenging.
Bring on corpse runs but the challenge should be in fighting your way back to your corpse, not running for an hour because your not bound next to the dungeon.
Bring on face to face trading but give me a way to find buyers/sellers without having to sit and yell for 8 hours once I finally get that rare drop in a challenging dungeon.
I love gaming but gaming has to compete with other aspects of our life for time. I'd love to spend 40 hours a week playinng Pantheon while being challenged and making friends. I don't want to spend 20 of 40 hours invested in time-sinks that do not advance my character or my social network.
Very well said.
Parascol said:I agree with this up until the point it becomes so unreasonable that people have to batphone to do it. That's where I draw the line, personally.
But yes, time is definitely something that should be factored. Lengthy raids and long quests requiring multiple raids to complete are welcomed by me!!!
Skill / challenge isn't just limited to class mastery and rotation though. Mechanics requiring situational awareness can play a big part in that. Knowing your rotation and being able to execute it while staying alive through new, unknown mechanics is another. But I generally think games have taken that to extremes also. I would much rather see the pace of combat slow down a little more and put more emphasis on group tactics and planning, rather than he who clicks fastest (twitch) wins style of combat. I would hope that clerics aren't just parked in a wall and standing in regular intervals to heal, but I don't want to just spam a rotation while dodging fireballs for 20 minutes to get through it either. Again, I'm kind of looking forward to a more deliberate and thoughtful approach that takes a little time to get through. Something sort of in-between with the auto-attack tab targeting method in focus.
If I want furious action packed combat, I'll go play those games instead. I want variety and Pantheon is a welcome addition. It's good to have choices depending on what mood I'm in that day. :)
I might get carried away a bit when I say how long something should take but to me there is tremedous value to items that require a large amount of playing time to earn. Timesink doesnt have to mean easy, boring content; It could be difficult stuff but make it take a while. Ideally, the best items in a game would involve multiple aspects of the game, ie. rare drops from raids would be one part of it, gathering rare materials and high level crafting should be involved as well.
Pilch said:For me, challenge in an MMO comes from persistence and endurance, not quitting on some goal that takes a significant amount of time... completing lengthy quests that may seem tedious while you are doing them, spending 2 hours leveling only to die and lose all that exp but still logging in the following day to try again, running to a certain zone for 30 minutes only to be killed and have to make the trip all over again, killing a raid boss 5 times and still not getting the drop you have been wanting. It is a test of mental fortitude... "Is it worth it to try again?" For many people that answer is no but for many others, like me, heck yeah I'll try again and again and again. That is the type of challenge I am looking for in an MMO. Regardless of how challenging any combat system can be the timesink is always going to be required to separate the hardcore from the casual.
Thanks, Pilch. I cannot count the times I've tried to formulate something like that in various threads and given up. What some people lable as "tedius and not fun", is at the core of why I like to play MMOs. Rewards given for persistency, tenacity and endurance are just as sweet to me as those given for excellence or luck, if not more.
I suppose you can compare it to the satisfaction of completing a tripple iron man. I doubt those crazy enough to take on such a challenge do it because it's "fun".
@Jabir/Pilch - Agreed with both. And, it appears we have two active threads with the same thoughts going on - I posted similar thoughts in another thread. And along the same lines as your exercise analogy - I don't think anyone would claim a 5K (3.1 miles) is easier than a Marathon (26.3), even though both are "running" doing the same activity, while one just takes more time and is longer distance. While the act of running in either case is the same, it is the test of endurance/longetivity/commitment/training that differentiates the activity.
@Jabir/Raidan,
Thanks lol. It is really difficult to express in words the benefits to having the "tedius" stuff in the game. It's just something a player has to feel for themselves, when they finally get that item they spent so much time on. It took me a few rewrites to try to get my message across but still keep civility, which I think should always be the goal in these forms.
It's an interesting concept to think that a game should have rewards that can take such a large amount of time, and many people probably don't get the sense in it. But for me, I'd rather expand my character, and experience, in a single game for 5 years rather than play 5 different games in that same 5 years because all the rewards can be earned so quickly.
Just to give a bit of an example, at one point I was a big FFXI player. Certain gear, and even leveling in general, took so long in that game that when a new expansion came out most people still were not max level or max geared from the previous expansion. Compare that to FFXIV and people are max level in 1-2 weeks after a new expansion drops and everyone in town all has the same high level gear because its pretty easy to get.
Pilch said:I might get carried away a bit when I say how long something should take but to me there is tremedous value to items that require a large amount of playing time to earn. Timesink doesnt have to mean easy, boring content; It could be difficult stuff but make it take a while. Ideally, the best items in a game would involve multiple aspects of the game, ie. rare drops from raids would be one part of it, gathering rare materials and high level crafting should be involved as well.
Right. Agree. College would be a good example of this. No one loves writing long papers and doing homework nearly every night for many years. But graduating results in a deep sense of satisfaction when you finally cross the finish line. It's worthy of self-praise due to the scope of the accomplishment. Everyone feels proud when they complete it and the payoff is generally worth it.
But Raiden, I don’t have time to run a marathon. I have a super important JOB now and two kids. The race needs to be 2.4 miles or at least I need the option to ride a bike instead. Also the race needs to start and end on my schedule. Thanks!
I think we are discussing two different things here. I wasn't advocating for quick wins or handouts for progression. I want epic quests that take months and I want to fail and be challenged. I just don't want to sit in chat for 8 hours trading or wait 30 minutes for a boat followed by 1 hour of running so I can meet my friends. Some "tedium" is required but there is also room for improvment in quality of life over EQ.
I'm arguing against time-sinks just for the sake of time-sinks so people who can play 12 hours a day feel special. If your good at the game and you can play 12 hours a day then thats awesome. You will be farther along then most people and I'll cheer you on to take down content first.
Reading Pilch/Raidan/Parascol's posts, we agree on a lot of what we want in a game. Challenging content, slow progression, consequence. All good stuff, but I'm offering up my opinion that some things are just boring for myself and a goor portion of other gamers that loved EQ. Games can always improve.
Gnog said:But Raiden, I don’t have time to run a marathon. I have a super important JOB now and two kids. The race needs to be 2.4 miles or at least I need the option to ride a bike instead. Also the race needs to start and end on my schedule. Thanks!
good news! Pantheon will be a marathon that goes 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. You can jump in and run 2.4 miles when it works for you. Eventually you will get all 26 miles in.
We all have to work and pay bills. They make games where you can get 5 levels in 2.4 hours. Pantheon won't be that game. You can still play, you don't have to "Go Play WoW". But, don't expect them to change the game tenets because "I have to work". waaaaahhh. welcome to real life.
I have said this before and I will say it again. If you don't have time to play games, don't play games. If you MAKE time to play games, you will be able to play just like everyone else, around life.
Munk said:I think we are discussing two different things here. I wasn't advocating for quick wins or handouts for progression. I want epic quests that take months and I want to fail and be challenged. I just don't want to sit in chat for 8 hours trading or wait 30 minutes for a boat followed by 1 hour of running so I can meet my friends. Some "tedium" is required but there is also room for improvment in quality of life over EQ.
I'm arguing against time-sinks just for the sake of time-sinks so people who can play 12 hours a day feel special. If your good at the game and you can play 12 hours a day then thats awesome. You will be farther along then most people and I'll cheer you on to take down content first.
Reading Pilch/Raidan/Parascol's posts, we agree on a lot of what we want in a game. Challenging content, slow progression, consequence. All good stuff, but I'm offering up my opinion that some things are just boring for myself and a goor portion of other gamers that loved EQ. Games can always improve.
If it's anything like EQ was (since EQ seems to be the great benchmark), travel won't be overly tedious. I did not spend hours and hours a day traveling in EQ. Maybe 10-15 minutes to get into a dungeon. VR has commented on tedum and I would not expect there to be a ton of senseless time sinks, if any at all.
Having to explore the world on foot some of the time is part of the fun by giving you a sense of adventure and being part of an actual world. There will be some fast travel in the form of ports and movement speed buffs at the very least. I have faith in VR that they will design the world in such a way that you won't be traveling for very long periods very often. As you grow in power and wealth and need to branch out to more distant areas, you'll likely have ways of getting there without having to travel for miles on foot or boat every single time.
Munk said:I think we are discussing two different things here. I wasn't advocating for quick wins or handouts for progression. I want epic quests that take months and I want to fail and be challenged. I just don't want to sit in chat for 8 hours trading or wait 30 minutes for a boat followed by 1 hour of running so I can meet my friends. Some "tedium" is required but there is also room for improvment in quality of life over EQ.
I'm arguing against time-sinks just for the sake of time-sinks so people who can play 12 hours a day feel special. If your good at the game and you can play 12 hours a day then thats awesome. You will be farther along then most people and I'll cheer you on to take down content first.
Reading Pilch/Raidan/Parascol's posts, we agree on a lot of what we want in a game. Challenging content, slow progression, consequence. All good stuff, but I'm offering up my opinion that some things are just boring for myself and a goor portion of other gamers that loved EQ. Games can always improve.
That might be what it is at the start, but if the zones are intricate and fun, then you won't mind. Also, planning was a big thing in EQ, so you don't waste too much time. Later on, once you are mid level with good cash flow and items selling or hoarding and more friends made, you can ask for these things called ports from certain classes. In EQ, I did this a lot on my characters that couldn't port. My druid had a customer base where I would see the same names popping up and some of them would tip like 200pp per person when tping their guild across. There were also people who tipped me 1-10pp and I would TP them nonetheless. By the time you get tired of trecking across certain zones over and over you should be at a level where you can get ports and get to the place you want to in 10-15 mins.
Munk said:I think we are discussing two different things here. I wasn't advocating for quick wins or handouts for progression. I want epic quests that take months and I want to fail and be challenged. I just don't want to sit in chat for 8 hours trading or wait 30 minutes for a boat followed by 1 hour of running so I can meet my friends. Some "tedium" is required but there is also room for improvment in quality of life over EQ.
I'm arguing against time-sinks just for the sake of time-sinks so people who can play 12 hours a day feel special. If your good at the game and you can play 12 hours a day then thats awesome. You will be farther along then most people and I'll cheer you on to take down content first.
Reading Pilch/Raidan/Parascol's posts, we agree on a lot of what we want in a game. Challenging content, slow progression, consequence. All good stuff, but I'm offering up my opinion that some things are just boring for myself and a goor portion of other gamers that loved EQ. Games can always improve.
I definitely get what your saying and agree with the majority of it. I never played EQ so I don't know how long travel and everything took in that game. I played FFXI, which was based on the EQ formula, so I'm assuming it was similar but not exactly the same. In FFXI I dont remember the traveling being that extensive, maybe 30 minutes to get to one of the most remote camping grounds, which is still a lot but often times it was only about 15 minutes. What took the longest was actually finding a group, so hopefully VR will implement some way to help that process.
I'm not going to lie, there is absolutely some nostalgia at work in my head when I say what I want to be in Pantheon, lol. Realistically, being married and working full time I will be limited to 1-3hour play sessions maximum. I wont be able to do the long trips to a party then level for several hours like I used to. However, I'm fully expecting to have play sessions devoted to just travel with a bit of farming/exploring on the way.
A lot of us agree on the fundamentals I think, but maybe would approach improving them in different ways. Honestly, compared to the current MMO market anything would be an improvement.
There is one thing I absolutely agree with you on though, I dont want to be spamming chat to try to sell items for hours. Give me an option to sell on an organized marketboard and charge me a fee for all I care! lol
Parascol said:Well, I am not sure why your experience was different than mine, but we ran into other guilds constantly. I could point you to my old Erollisi Marr community forums and show you the hundreds of pages of flaming that ensued as a result of open world contested mobs.
All I know is that they said no instancing. So rather than try to convince us (and ultimately VR) to reinvent the wheel entirely, it might be more productive to consider the implications of open world challenges and how to overcome those. I'm sure there are lots of ways to incorporate interesting mechanics into an open world design. The contestation, raid size, raid mechanics, etc, can all be solved for on some level in an open world design.
But at the end of the day, they have said no instancing. If you want to waste energy trying to convince the world that it's the wrong decision, then I guess that's your right.
Edit: And by the way, there's a reason why you saw this on TLP. Based on these open-world design decisions, I would expect TLP to be a closer representation to what this game will be like at launch.
If you think that anything VR has said is set in stone you're just being naive. If they release the game with no instances and insanity ensues, I very much expect them to reconsider. That's what good game developers do.
If you can come up with a system that doesn't fall into the 3 I provided I would love to hear it. But fact of the matter is, instances for raising has proven to be the most effective way to handle raiding at endgame.
And to touch on the TLPs, the reason that happened was because there's nothing to do at max level in classic and kunark. So you end up with massive amounts of guilds fielding huge amounts of player ready to raid. So I'm not sure why you think that will happen again. What WILL happen is that prior to the release of the game several high end guilds will already be established and will select their servers. These guilds will be highly competitive and in most cases will easily be the #1 guild on their respective servers by a large margin. It will be quite a while before any guilds even attempt to contest the top guilds on raid content.
Porygon said:Parascol said:Well, I am not sure why your experience was different than mine, but we ran into other guilds constantly. I could point you to my old Erollisi Marr community forums and show you the hundreds of pages of flaming that ensued as a result of open world contested mobs.
All I know is that they said no instancing. So rather than try to convince us (and ultimately VR) to reinvent the wheel entirely, it might be more productive to consider the implications of open world challenges and how to overcome those. I'm sure there are lots of ways to incorporate interesting mechanics into an open world design. The contestation, raid size, raid mechanics, etc, can all be solved for on some level in an open world design.
But at the end of the day, they have said no instancing. If you want to waste energy trying to convince the world that it's the wrong decision, then I guess that's your right.
Edit: And by the way, there's a reason why you saw this on TLP. Based on these open-world design decisions, I would expect TLP to be a closer representation to what this game will be like at launch.
If you think that anything VR has said is set in stone you're just being naive. If they release the game with no instances and insanity ensues, I very much expect them to reconsider. That's what good game developers do.
If you can come up with a system that doesn't fall into the 3 I provided I would love to hear it. But fact of the matter is, instances for raising has proven to be the most effective way to handle raiding at endgame.
And to touch on the TLPs, the reason that happened was because there's nothing to do at max level in classic and kunark. So you end up with massive amounts of guilds fielding huge amounts of player ready to raid. So I'm not sure why you think that will happen again. What WILL happen is that prior to the release of the game several high end guilds will already be established and will select their servers. These guilds will be highly competitive and in most cases will easily be the #1 guild on their respective servers by a large margin. It will be quite a while before any guilds even attempt to contest the top guilds on raid content.
Well, I don't think VR is hiring right now, but you should keep an eye on their employment opportunities page. I think you would have more luck convincing them by being on the development team than by what you post here.
Every single example that was put forth can be solved for in an open world design. Honestly. You can cap raid sizes. You can include interesting mechanics. You can still isolate encounters from the rest of the zone and limit those mechanics to that area. Etc etc etc. The only real advantage I see to instancing is the ability to completely eliminate any contestation.
Maybe I misunderstood, but the reason I said this will be closer to TLP, is because everyone will be starting and progressing at the same time (which is the spirit of TLP, isn't it?). There's three raid zones planned right now and depending on server populations, there's bound to be guilds competing for those. How often is hard to say until we get in and see what clearing these zones involves, or how many guilds they can each support. It really just comes down to content available and the demand for it. But my guess is that the supply will be less than the demand (just like you saw in classic and kunark combined). It's just a guess though, since we know nothing about it other than there will be three zones.
The irony here is that I actually agree with you. It's a concern for me too. But instancing isn't the only answer. It's just not. Vanguard literally solved this with lockouts and fast respawns. You may have had to wait another day or two, but you could do it.
I'm pretty confident this game won't fall back to instancing as a crutch for content accessibility. I think the primary plan is to have plenty of content, meaningful travel, and healthy server populations. They have mentioned utilizing the ghost mechanic from Vanguard before but that feature doesn't really translate that well considering the current kill credit formula. I think we are more likely to see picks/shards than anything else, assuming there is "too much" competition for resources. These would basically be duplicate copies of a given zone. For me ... they still feel like instancing. I would be highly disappointed if picks/shards make their way into Pantheon for any reason. The ghost mechanic is superior for an open world game but it would be tricky to make it work with MDD. We shall see!
Parascol said:Every single example that was put forth can be solved for in an open world design. Honestly. You can cap raid sizes. You can include interesting mechanics. You can still isolate encounters from the rest of the zone and limit those mechanics to that area. Etc etc etc. The only real advantage I see to instancing is the ability to completely eliminate any contestation.
I've yet to see a system in force that allowed for open world competition and also was not easily exploitable.
If you know of one I would love to hear about it.
Parascol said:Gnog said:We need a stickied thread titled “Cry About Wanting Instances Here”. It should just link to the FAQ. It would reduce the thread count on this forum by 20-30%.
Apparently we are naive to believe the FAQ.
I want you to tell me right now, that you honestly believe everything that's in the FAQ is still going to be in the game after the 1st expansion release. Please lol.
Porygon said:Parascol said:Gnog said:We need a stickied thread titled “Cry About Wanting Instances Here”. It should just link to the FAQ. It would reduce the thread count on this forum by 20-30%.
Apparently we are naive to believe the FAQ.
I want you to tell me right now, that you honestly believe everything that's in the FAQ is still going to be in the game after the 1st expansion release. Please lol.
I believe that open world will be the design choice, yes. No one can predict the future, so obviously I cannot say with 100% certainty that they won't change that. But if I were to bet, I'd bet on open world. In fact, in a way I already did, considering I gave them money knowing those intentions up-front. But maybe not, maybe there will be a blend? Either way, there will likely be open world raiding. That's why I keep saying it might be more productive to focus on solutions with open world design in mind.
So what exploits do you think will happen, and what solutions can you think of to mitigate or eliminate them (without instancing)?
As far as trying to predict what they do in future expansions? That's just an exercise in futility. Why is this even being discussed at this point in development? That's so incredibly off-topic.
You mocked my statement regarding being naive. So I just wanted to see how you felt. I've invested into the game also. I'm fine with open world. I know what type of gamer I am and I know where my status on the server will be.
My concern is longevity of the game. I know exactly how it will happen.
There are a ton of players on these forums that yearn to recreate the thrill and excitement of everquest (I do as well). The design of modern MMOs has them wanting more, and pantheon will deliver.
The issue is that we will never recreate our experience in eq, even with a direct mirror, because we are far more experienced in not only general mmo knowledge but also what we expect to want to accomplish endgame.
For example, when I started playing eq I didnt know what raiding was. I never knew I would become so entrenched in an aspect of the game such as that. So it didnt matter if i want able to partake in it. Once i learned of this feature, it's been my goal in every mmo since then.
There will be players on these forums. Arguing against instances, because they think they will be able to compete or they think they will have what it takes to make it... but they can't and they don't. In an open world game there will be 1 guild per server (in most cases) that dominates the raiding scene from the get go. And other guilds will not compete. Now at first that's fine because it'll take secondary guilds a while longer to organize and gear up... but once they do, they will expect a system that allows them to attempt raids.
If VR is unable to create this system they will take to the forums and complain, because that is what people do. When a massive amount of players begin to ask VR to change their system, they will have nothing else to do than to listen (just like wow). So they will either change it to some form of lockout system (which all of them are easily exploitable [all of them that I've seen]) or instances. If you want to talk about ways to exploit them. You can PM me if you really care.
This is how this game will go. Unless VR launches with an elaborate system that is unexploitable (which I'm sure is possible. But I haven't seen it.). Even the people here talking trash and making fun, once pushed into a corner, will eventually settle for instanced raiding (which is why SO MANY players moved to phinegal TLP).
Porygon said:You mocked my statement regarding being naive. So I just wanted to see how you felt. I've invested into the game also. I'm fine with open world. I know what type of gamer I am and I know where my status on the server will be.
My concern is longevity of the game. I know exactly how it will happen.
There are a ton of players on these forums that yearn to recreate the thrill and excitement of everquest (I do as well). The design of modern MMOs has them wanting more, and pantheon will deliver.
The issue is that we will never recreate our experience in eq, even with a direct mirror, because we are far more experienced in not only general mmo knowledge but also what we expect to want to accomplish endgame.
For example, when I started playing eq I didnt know what raiding was. I never knew I would become so entrenched in an aspect of the game such as that. So it didnt matter if i want able to partake in it. Once i learned of this feature, it's been my goal in every mmo since then.
There will be players on these forums. Arguing against instances, because they think they will be able to compete or they think they will have what it takes to make it... but they can't and they don't. In an open world game there will be 1 guild per server (in most cases) that dominates the raiding scene from the get go. And other guilds will not compete. Now at first that's fine because it'll take secondary guilds a while longer to organize and gear up... but once they do, they will expect a system that allows them to attempt raids.
If VR is unable to create this system they will take to the forums and complain, because that is what people do. When a massive amount of players begin to ask VR to change their system, they will have nothing else to do than to listen (just like wow). So they will either change it to some form of lockout system (which all of them are easily exploitable [all of them that I've seen]) or instances. If you want to talk about ways to exploit them. You can PM me if you really care.
This is how this game will go. Unless VR launches with an elaborate system that is unexploitable (which I'm sure is possible. But I haven't seen it.). Even the people here talking trash and making fun, once pushed into a corner, will eventually settle for instanced raiding (which is why SO MANY players moved to phinegal TLP).
Pretty tired of the back and forth at this point. There are limiters they could implement to help share the wealth in an open world design. I don't know how many more ways I can say that.
They might not even do that. We don't know.
You didn't offer up what exploits would happen, or how to negate them. I'm out. I'm bored with regurgitating the same things. We all know you want instances. Message received.
Porygon said:
You mocked my statement regarding being naive. So I just wanted to see how you felt. I've invested into the game also. I'm fine with open world. I know what type of gamer I am and I know where my status on the server will be.
Porygon said:
My concern is longevity of the game. I know exactly how it will happen.
Porygon said:
There are a ton of players on these forums that yearn to recreate the thrill and excitement of everquest (I do as well). The design of modern MMOs has them wanting more, and pantheon will deliver.
Porygon said:
For example, when I started playing eq I didnt know what raiding was. I never knew I would become so entrenched in an aspect of the game such as that. So it didnt matter if i want able to partake in it. Once i learned of this feature, it's been my goal in every mmo since then.
Porygon said:
There will be players on these forums. Arguing against instances, because they think they will be able to compete or they think they will have what it takes to make it... but they can't and they don't. In an open world game there will be 1 guild per server (in most cases) that dominates the raiding scene from the get go. And other guilds will not compete. Now at first that's fine because it'll take secondary guilds a while longer to organize and gear up... but once they do, they will expect a system that allows them to attempt raids.
Porygon said:
If VR is unable to create this system they will take to the forums and complain, because that is what people do. When a massive amount of players begin to ask VR to change their system, they will have nothing else to do than to listen (just like wow). So they will either change it to some form of lockout system (which all of them are easily exploitable [all of them that I've seen]) or instances. If you want to talk about ways to exploit them. You can PM me if you really care.