KickStarter Pantheon - (Brad "EQ" McQuaid's new MMO)

[Xenich]

About auto maps and dungeon progression in general...

Here is a map to show the complexity of EQs dungeon design:
Upper and lower (live/dead side) Guk

Spoiler

This makes up two zones of Upper Guk, and Lower Guk. Lower Guk is split up based on mob type with one side being living frogs and the other side being undead frogs, but is essentially still one zone.

The Dungeon is very complex (and as you can see HUGE), very difficult to traverse as it is packed with numerous frog NPCs at every corner. To complicate issues, NPCs in EQ run away at a certain percentage of health and the Frogs all run (hop) at faster than normal run speeds. The result is that before you realize it, the frog can run away picking up adds along the way resulting in a MASSIVE train and certain death to the group. So, it is required that someone be able to snare, stun, root, etc... to avoid such an escape.


When I first did this zone, there was no in game map system and there was no out of game map system either. Muse didn't start making the maps until a bit later as he became higher level and was able to more easily map the areas.

As you can tell, it was quite the learning adventure. Knowing how to get around Guk fully was considered a prized skill. Learning Guk was a progression over a characters life time of levels and one could essentially spend their entire progression there if they chose. Upper Guk's level range was 4-25+, while Lower Guk was 30-50+. Learning the dungeon was a process of camping small chunks at a time of the area and slowly progressing through. As a monk, I was often the designated puller/scout. I would bring in the mobs to a static camp we setup and we would pull the surrounding area. As I did, I reported my findings to the group, things such as mob locations both standard and named. Roaming mobs and their intervals, empty rooms for possible safe spots, pits/traps, hidden walls and secret areas, etc... As we learned a given area, we would move in deeper.

Leveling in EQ took a VERY long time. So, by the time, a group who had spent quite a bit of time in Guk was nearing the cap of the dungeon, they knew it like the back of their hand (more so those who did the scouting and pulling). Maps as you see above were a "convenience", a helper tool, not a means for navigation for those unfamiliar with the area. If you didn't know the zone, the map would help in simpler dungeon designs, but in complex ones such as Guk where there secret walls, hidden pits that drop to other levels, etc... it had its limitations, an offline map a such would give you a basic feel, you still had to learn the dungeon by physical sight. The dungeons were too dangerous to idle too long in a non-safe spot.

Now enter some of the game mechanics. As I said, the dungeon was deadly, mobs were packed everywhere, could run faster than you and the areas were tight with turns so you couldn't see a mob (or group) often until you agro'd it. Some classes in the game had invisibility (two types, to living and undead), but how long an invis spell lasted was random. It could last anywhere from 10 seconds to 30 mins and EQ did not allow you to see your buff timers, so invis could drop at some really bad times. Add in the fact that there was also the spell "see invis" and you had big problems. Every NPC in the game used the same class system that players had. So, certain mobs could see invis, but it was not easy to see which ones because even if you noticed a given "type" of mob to be a certain class, it didn't mean they weren't buffed by another mob they passed by as they patrolled the area. So, as I said, invis was not a reliable means to slowly explore and map out a dungeon. You used invis for quick traversal, often stopping at safe spots to increase your ability to mitigate a dropped invis and the add likely to come with it.

The point is, you had to learn the zone and it was a major accomplishment to learn such. There were people who were sought after in groups because they were essentially "guides" to the zone. They knew the ins and outs, the secrets, the mob locations, etc...

This is getting back to my point. The auto-maps we see in today's games removes this basic subtle feature of play. The exploration, the danger of it, the risk and reward of exploring and finding things others dare not or were not skilled enough to achieve. With auto-map systems, the player knows where they are, where they are heading at all times, etc... (add in a radar map and it just kills this entire aspect of play) like I said, an out of game map does give a lot of info, but looking at a static map and looking at the area in game isn't that easy often, especially in a dungeon such as this.

When people talk about the "feeling" they remember in EQ, I argue it is things like this they are talking about. It is the risk and reward, the mystery and scale of such a dungeon, the progression over levels in a single area. This is what people miss and this is what "convenience" took away from the game and why people can't seem to find that "feeling" they had in EQ.

One last comment about zones being invalidated over levels. Look at this dungeon, this is what I am talking about as it concerns "striping" of content in a zone. Notice how in a single major dungeon it consists of levels from 4-50? Remember, this is one of the first dungeons from the original release where the level cap was 50. A single dungeon among 50 zones of content to explore. If you continue to layer new level caps and content within these zones as you release expansions, it can keep old content alive for a much longer time.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Just chiming in, after getting a bit nostalgic after reading all this. I think the game has only a future, if it sticks as close to its niche as possible. If you don't it will be stuck in the middle, appealing to no one.

If you want to make an "accessible" game, you have to make it as accessible as possible. FF XIV 2.0 is a success, because after their strategic decision to "wow"ify the game, they stuck to it and did so to the utmost extent and didn't just brush over some FFXIV 1.0 (or XI) mechanics. (And that's probably why I enjoyed it as a "good for what it is" game – though admittedly, it was also my first MMORPG after a nearly decade long hiatus).

I just wonder, how you can rekindle the awe you felt in early EQ, at a time, when people didn't even invent "raiding" yet. You kind of stumbled into the world and explored it, today, if you start a new game, they approach is much more focussed, more analytic and targeted. I remember the wizard spires in Greater Faydark. I'd ask people what they were for and no one knew. Later news began to trickle in, that high level wizards could use them for teleports. That just wouldn't be possible in a game today, even a niche one.

 

[Xenich]

Just chiming in, after getting a bit nostalgic after reading all this. I think the game has only a future, if it sticks as close to its niche as possible. If you don't it will be stuck in the middle, appealing to no one.

If you want to make an "accessible" game, you have to make iras accessible as possible. FF XIV 2.0 is a success, because after their strategic decision to "wow"ify the game, they stuck to it and did so to the utmost extent and don't just brush over some FFXIV 1.0 (or XI) mechanics. (And that's probably why I enjoyed it as a "good for what it is" game – though admittedly, it was also my first MMORPG after a nearly decade long hiatus).

I just wonder, how you can rekindle the awe you felt in early EQ, at a time, when people didn't even invent "raiding" yet. You kind of stumbled into the world and explored it, today, if you start a new game, they approach is much more focussed, more analytic and targeted. I remember the wizard spires in Greater Faydark. I'd ask people what they were for and no one knew. Later news began to trickle in, that high level wizards could use them for teleports. That just wouldn't be possible in a game today, even a niche one.

There can still be that level of mystery. Even in EQ, there were forums where people spilled all the information they found and if one was so inclined, they could sift through and gain knowledge prior to experiencing it or discovering it themselves. The difference is that you can choose to spoil it or not. I never cared about that. Also, I didn't look up raid strats in EQ. I devised my own based on my knowledge of my raid and their strengths. So you can play the game, enjoy the mystery without ruining the experience. The trick is not catering to those people because they ruin their own game.

I do agree though. If they are going to succeed, they can not do it standing on the fence. They have to cater to their niche or this game will fail like every other game out there that attempted to serve two masters.

 

[Aenra]

That sense of wonder entails three things for me:
(and granted, they really ARE a bitch to pull through, so excuses can be made IF it's apparent that an honest effort was made)

- Large areas.
I mean large, a-la Vanguard. If i can see the end from where i am standing or in a couple of minutes' walk, that's "modern". Not large.
Vanguard reference here for beyond the obvious, since for every two experts, we get.. Vanguard had a most respectable land mass, a non instanced land mass at that, but also one not densely populated with mobs. Plenty of beautiful, sprawling vistas, no mobs there to ruin the feeling of travel, of your going somewhere new. Now THAT was large done right. Which is why no one ever did it again. If it's right, MMO retards won't like it. Of course, in the case of Pantheon? Talk is nice and cheap, but Unity 5 + Massively Online + Large Areas? Nuh uh. On top of this, whatever they do manage to pull through, will also have to be instanced. So that's one off the list ^^

- Mechanics/Systems bewilderment. *
I want some element of novelty, some sense of having logged into something i know NOT. If i log in for the first time, see 'c' for Character, Fireball in my hotkey slot, and mana numbers under my avatard i know i am not getting it. I think it is safe to say that the closest Pantheon will get to "new"/"bewildering" is a renaming of the mana resource to something else. This is not a project about the founding or testing of new/different/complex ideas. This is a project of nostalgia, and nostalgia alone. Two off the list, gets worse ^^

- Some degree of surprise(?), bafflement(?) or failing that, awe. A setting/overall vibe that makes me go KingComrade, lol.. nod head, prop up, we're into something here, get down to this, you know the feeling?
This last i have written of anyway..ok..and not even appliccable for Pantheon, as at best (and still on doubt regarding that, but at best) they are aiming for a re-cloning. I do not see how i can expect me to get an 'awe' factor when i not only know what i'm getting into, but have actually helped fund an EQ One II it. So three out of three off the list, though again, this last i can understand

* The sad part (as i see it, which is also the reason for my pessimism in all things RotF related), is that this is the one part where we could have had something. EQ was the idea. The bad, shoddy, 1990 tech implementation of it is something not entirely essential to reconstruct. We could have had all the time consuming, socially engaging, group forced, grind heavy elements, but with plenty of twists, systemic reimaginings and reimplementations. Could have. And please kid not yourselves, this shit has absolutely fuck all to do with budget. Learn what to excuse, and what not to. Even now, fifteen years down the row. Never too late. Ideas are free, they come to you when in the shitter, the car, the super market

 

[Xenich]

- Large areas.
I mean large, a-la Vanguard. If i can see the end from where i am standing or in a couple of minutes' walk, that's "modern". Not large.
Vanguard reference here for beyond the obvious, since for every two experts, we get.. Vanguard had a most respectable land mass, a non instanced land mass at that, but also one not densely populated with mobs. Plenty of beautiful, sprawling vistas, no mobs there to ruin the feeling of travel, of your going somewhere new. Now THAT was large done right. Which is why no one ever did it again. If it's right, MMO retards won't like it. Of course, in the case of Pantheon? Talk is nice and cheap, but Unity 5 + Massively Online + Large Areas? Nuh uh. On top of this, whatever they do manage to pull through, will also have to be instanced. So that's one off the list ^^

Can you put some numbers to your mention? How big were the maps in Vanguard (ie numbers) as opposed to the capabilities of Unity 5? You are making the claim that Unity 5 can't provide a large area with zoning. I am just interested in what this is based on?

Edit:

Oh, btw, Vanguard was instanced as well, it is just that the "chunks" were designed for seamless loading, though if you had a really slow connection you would get the loading message between them.

 

[Ranselknulf]

I don't think size matters as much as how quickly the area is traversed.

 

[Xenich]

I don't think size matters as much as how quickly the area is traversed.

Agreed.

 

[Aenra]

Bollocks to you both, with all due respect

Small is small. Making it "smart" hard to navigate by placing artificial barriers everywhere, forcing you to pick sidepath to sidepath to get to what's obviously 5 meters ahead of you (you can see it through the map function) is hardly the same as large. Which is maybe the wrong term, let us say spacious. It is a different feeling having to traverse gear/drop/mob unrelated land in order to reach something, it is different being offered the damn option to just WALK, see if something nice is over thereish, and it is most certainly different when doing so you may (just may) end up in a very cozy/pretty/bizarre little area of no significance (to retards) other than the fact of its reinforcing the feeling that you are in a fucking WORLD. Because organic entails just that. Not everything will be of practical use, not everything can or will be streamlined, not everything is alike. Even within a pre-defined area. And i won't even go on how much different it is when having this, you get to experience it with other people. That notion of 'sharing' something you two, three found that is off the path. If you people play to hunt the mob, compass or castle, your prerogative.
Bit hard to get all that in small areas. Way lesser landmarks, way lesser mass in between the inevitable choke points (this is how you "smartly" make the small look ok through geography), way less chances to achieve the above therefore. And last but definitely not least, almost impossible to find such a place. Many people and small areas combined kinda disallow that for good.

And Xenich, everything is "instanced". The game itself is one big "instance". I thought you did not like it technical?
Let me rephrase the above then to "hidden triggers and loaders" rather than the shitty "pull the customer out of the game entirely while the client loads, from scratch, the new area". And i think you know what i meant
As far as Unity is concerned, you can google it. For one, it was not made for MMOs, not originally, it just got hijacked for those as well due its being cheap, efficient and idiot-proof. For another, up and until this moment there is no Unity network code, whcih only worsens the problem as on top of it not being tailored for MMOs (unless you got the savvy to do this yourself), you also need to develop said networking code on your own. So far this has yet to be done in a way that precludes the common Unity + MMO problems from re-occuring. It can typically have issues just handling the mass content that makes an MMO. When on top of it you start putting people in it? To be rendered real-time in their dozens? Not particularly optimal. Which is why devs tend to segment their areas into smaller chunks. Less resource-heavy. Yes, progress has been made, no, still no way near being worthy of called 'Good' for an MMO. What it is is 'cheap'. That's why we got it.

 

[Xenich]

Bollocks to you both, with all due respect

Small is small. Making it "smart" hard to navigate by placing artificial barriers everywhere, forcing you to pick sidepath to sidepath to get to what's obviously 5 meters ahead of you (you can see it through the map function) is hardly the same as large. Which is maybe the wrong term, let us say spacious. It is a different feeling having to traverse gear/drop/mob unrelated land in order to reach something, it is different being offered the damn option to just WALK, see if something nice is over thereish, and it is most certainly different when doing so you may (just may) end up in a very cozy/pretty/bizarre little area of no significance (to retards) other than the fact of its reinforcing the feeling that you are in a fucking WORLD. Because organic entails just that. Not everything will be of practical use, not everything can or will be streamlined, not everything is alike. Even within a pre-defined area. And i won't even go on how much different it is when having this, you get to experience it with other people. That notion of 'sharing' something you two, three found that is off the path. If you people play to hunt the mob, compass or castle, your prerogative.
Bit hard to get all that in small areas. Way lesser landmarks, way lesser mass in between the inevitable choke points (this is how you "smartly" make the small look ok through geography), way less chances to achieve the above therefore. And last but definitely not least, almost impossible to find such a place. Many people and small areas combined kinda disallow that for good.

I think he meant speed of movement as one of the elements dealing with such. Do you consider EQ zones small? They felt quite large and contained much of what you speak of. In fact, recently I was running through West Karana in SoD (EQ private server) and it took me 10+ mins to run through it. EQ had rather large zones with all that you speak. So I am not really worried about them achieving that level of exploration.

And Xenich, everything is "instanced". The game itself is one big "instance". I thought you did not like it technical?
Let me rephrase the above then to "hidden triggers and loaders" rather than the shitty "pull the customer out of the game entirely while the client loads, from scratch, the new area". And i think you know what i meant
As far as Unity is concerned, you can google it. For one, it was not made for MMOs, not originally, it just got hijacked for those as well due its being cheap, efficient and idiot-proof. For another, up and until this moment there is no Unity network code, whcih only worsens the problem as on top of it not being tailored for MMOs (unless you got the savvy to do this yourself), you also need to develop said networking code on your own. So far this has yet to be done in a way that precludes the common Unity + MMO problems from re-occuring. It can typically have issues just handling the mass content that makes an MMO. When on top of it you start putting people in it? To be rendered real-time in their dozens? Not particularly optimal. Which is why devs tend to segment their areas into smaller chunks. Less resource-heavy. Yes, progress has been made, no, still no way near being worthy of called 'Good' for an MMO. What it is is 'cheap'. That's why we got it.

Where did I say I didn't like technical? Regardless, in this context it is important as a frame of reference to support your objection. For instance, if you think EQ zones are too small, well... then I at least see where we would disagree.

As for Unity, you do realize that Pantheon already has a fully functioning client/server system working? That is, Brad and team have already created the networking system.

As for the size, I see this as pointless discussion if we are not to have any frame of reference to work with. You can claim that there are limitations to the engine, but if you are not specific in comparison to that of a previous engine, it is meaningless. As I said previously, EQs zones were fine to achieve the feeling of adventure and exploration and this game will be at least based on that frame of reference. I think a question on zone size was brought up and Brad said the zones were quite large and the issue of constant "loading" wouldn't be an issue. In fact, if you watched any of the videos, I think you can get a fair idea as to the size and feeling. You seem to argue from a point of ignorance on this, have you looked into it?

 

[Aenra]

I talk about how large/spacious can contribute outside the measurable, in terms of experience/feeling/organic whole, and as such how time taken to go through a 'zone' means fuck all by itself;
[since you can go "smart" and have it very small while still needing 10 hours to reach other end. As i explain how above]
Time needed aside, because it is an artificial time, with arbitrary, purposefully put barriers, the land cannot lend itself to more than its purpose: Appear larger, and force you to go through specific 'chokepoints'. Cover in other words its drawbacks. Still small, still unable to convey the aspects i mention in detail above. And how do you reply to that? Let me quote you:

Do you consider EQ zones small? They felt quite large and contained much of what you speak of

By reminding me of EQ ..random.. more so, a random, inapplicable comparison of EQ zones to those of a game that:
a) you have not run, and as such can only base arguments upon what you know of Unity.
b) is being made with a different engine. Different. Not EQ's.
c) whose "ingame" videos mean nothing yet, when systems are not implemented (less resources needed) and the players are not rendered real-time at more than three per video. It's why devs 'cut back' upon iterating sometimes.

Not incidentally, i move on to relate to you, in a perilepsis of course, the issues faced with Unity developed MMOs, and what do you have to reply...let me quote you again:

As for Unity, you do realize that Pantheon already has a fully functioning client/server system working

Do YOU realise that the other Unity MMOs, lol..they too have a fucking system working! Or they wouldn't be online! And yet..they still have these issues! Now did i also mention how Unity was not originally meant for MMOs? And that after having to make your own code, you are still left with the issues e-ve-ry-o-ne else has to face? I did. And yet. Mind you, this is all assuming Brad does a better coding job than he did in Vanguard, where lagfest was given a whooole new meaning. Just because he says it's there..doesn't mean much. We'll see exactly what's there when it needs to cope with thousands of players simultaneously. But anyway, assuming it performs fine;
I lastly reminded you that it is precisely due to the above combined that developers are often forced to resort to smaller land chunks when using UNITY. And what do you reply to that, one last time, quoting you:

As I said previously, EQs zones were fine to achieve the feeling of adventure and exploration and this game will be at least based on that frame of reference

EQs zones were fine

.. am not getting through, am i? ..

 

[Ranselknulf]

I don't think anybody is arguing for small zones. I was just pointing out that a large zone can feel small because of travel speed.


MMO's do attract a special breed of OCD and argumentative habits but I guess that comes with the territory.

 

[Aenra]

No one here has OCD. No one. I take my shoes off and can find it within me to leave them non-parallel to one another as long as the angle thus formed is less than 10 degrees. OCD my ass ..
Am in a bad mood today anyway. Being pissed off since i woke up, lol, i don't even fucking know why exactly.. whatever.

 

[Xenich]

Aenra, you need to spend more time clearly explaining your point. I don't understand what you are saying because you are vague in your argument. That is, your explanation reads more like you trying to describe to me a vague feeling you have rather than a clearly established set of points.

From the start of this discussion on this topic as it concerns large zones... You stated that:

Vanguard had a most respectable land mass, a non instanced land mass at that, but also one not densely populated with mobs. Plenty of beautiful, sprawling vistas, no mobs there to ruin the feeling of travel, of your going somewhere new.

This you claimed "Now THAT was large done right."

That is why I brought up EQ, it was zoned (instanced) areas. Even so, it was very large in its zone size. Vanguard is pretty much the same, but its chunks allowed for seamless loading, though as I stated... a person with a slow machine would still run into loading issues. Now in terms of visual spaciousness, I assume you are talking about the vast feeling of size in the visual distance? Such as even though I may be nearing a zone line, I can see all the elements of the next zone (ala Karanas in EQ?). EQ while old in technology, had many areas that provided the open sense of sprawling vistas with sparse populations of mobs to give that feeling of travel (EQ's: Karanas, Frontier mountains, etc...) . Some zones were very large, sparsely populated, with hidden gems at certain areas to which were not evident by viewing from a distance and felt as if you happened upon them.

What would help me understand your point is if you used a point of reference as I am. You speak of Vanguard being "done right", explain a specific point in Vanguard and compare that to a point in EQ to give an example (as I have with the Karanas).

As for Unity, honestly... I am not worried. I understand your objection, but... well... to think that Brad having already made two MMOs hasn't considered issues with the system and if they can fill in the lacking of it to obtain their goals, would be to assume he is some armature who has no idea what he is doing. Now I am not saying there may not be issues with Unity, but don't you think they considered them when they began? I haven't looked into these issues in detail with the forums over at Pantheon, I am sure someone has brought such up in either the forums or the pod casts. Also, one of the developers there does live casts often of his zone building and will answer questions while you are watching him build. Ever consider bringing up such questions there?

My point is, you seem to be solidified in your position, that the engine is wrong, it won't achieve what you claim it needs. You also have many objections to the implementations they are putting in (ie you hate camping and have shown disagreement with many old school elements of design), so I have to ask, why bother? Is just for discussion?

Edit:
A comment on Unity from the Pantheon forums

The lead world builder Montreseur (he is the one that has live streams of his work):

Unity, for the most part will do what you tell it to do. It does this of course within the limit of current standard hardware, and networking constraints. Some functions are built in, others need to be built from the ground up. The top 3 engines available to the public(Unity, Unreal, and CryEngine) all have pros, cons, and some different features or ways of handling things. For the most part there is not a limit on the types of games you can create with them..

Montreseur at MMORPG.com

I understand a lot of people would like to see a seamless game world. I do think that our zone size will mitigate the effect of the game being zone based, you shouldn't feel boxed in, nor should the world feel crammed because of it. Thinking back to the old EverQuest days, zoning took quite some time on a lot of machines, but a lot of time has passed now. Given our standard more powerful hardware, and faster internet speeds; zoning should not take very long at all.

Seems to me that as I said, they have considered the pros/cons for Pantheon. /shrug

 

[Nael]

About auto maps and dungeon progression in general...

Here is a map to show the complexity of EQs dungeon design:
Upper and lower (live/dead side) Guk

Spoiler

This makes up two zones of Upper Guk, and Lower Guk. Lower Guk is split up based on mob type with one side being living frogs and the other side being undead frogs, but is essentially still one zone.

The Dungeon is very complex (and as you can see HUGE), very difficult to traverse as it is packed with numerous frog NPCs at every corner. To complicate issues, NPCs in EQ run away at a certain percentage of health and the Frogs all run (hop) at faster than normal run speeds. The result is that before you realize it, the frog can run away picking up adds along the way resulting in a MASSIVE train and certain death to the group. So, it is required that someone be able to snare, stun, root, etc... to avoid such an escape.


When I first did this zone, there was no in game map system and there was no out of game map system either. Muse didn't start making the maps until a bit later as he became higher level and was able to more easily map the areas.

As you can tell, it was quite the learning adventure. Knowing how to get around Guk fully was considered a prized skill. Learning Guk was a progression over a characters life time of levels and one could essentially spend their entire progression there if they chose. Upper Guk's level range was 4-25+, while Lower Guk was 30-50+. Learning the dungeon was a process of camping small chunks at a time of the area and slowly progressing through. As a monk, I was often the designated puller/scout. I would bring in the mobs to a static camp we setup and we would pull the surrounding area. As I did, I reported my findings to the group, things such as mob locations both standard and named. Roaming mobs and their intervals, empty rooms for possible safe spots, pits/traps, hidden walls and secret areas, etc... As we learned a given area, we would move in deeper.

Leveling in EQ took a VERY long time. So, by the time, a group who had spent quite a bit of time in Guk was nearing the cap of the dungeon, they knew it like the back of their hand (more so those who did the scouting and pulling). Maps as you see above were a "convenience", a helper tool, not a means for navigation for those unfamiliar with the area. If you didn't know the zone, the map would help in simpler dungeon designs, but in complex ones such as Guk where there secret walls, hidden pits that drop to other levels, etc... it had its limitations, an offline map a such would give you a basic feel, you still had to learn the dungeon by physical sight. The dungeons were too dangerous to idle too long in a non-safe spot.

Now enter some of the game mechanics. As I said, the dungeon was deadly, mobs were packed everywhere, could run faster than you and the areas were tight with turns so you couldn't see a mob (or group) often until you agro'd it. Some classes in the game had invisibility (two types, to living and undead), but how long an invis spell lasted was random. It could last anywhere from 10 seconds to 30 mins and EQ did not allow you to see your buff timers, so invis could drop at some really bad times. Add in the fact that there was also the spell "see invis" and you had big problems. Every NPC in the game used the same class system that players had. So, certain mobs could see invis, but it was not easy to see which ones because even if you noticed a given "type" of mob to be a certain class, it didn't mean they weren't buffed by another mob they passed by as they patrolled the area. So, as I said, invis was not a reliable means to slowly explore and map out a dungeon. You used invis for quick traversal, often stopping at safe spots to increase your ability to mitigate a dropped invis and the add likely to come with it.

The point is, you had to learn the zone and it was a major accomplishment to learn such. There were people who were sought after in groups because they were essentially "guides" to the zone. They knew the ins and outs, the secrets, the mob locations, etc...

This is getting back to my point. The auto-maps we see in today's games removes this basic subtle feature of play. The exploration, the danger of it, the risk and reward of exploring and finding things others dare not or were not skilled enough to achieve. With auto-map systems, the player knows where they are, where they are heading at all times, etc... (add in a radar map and it just kills this entire aspect of play) like I said, an out of game map does give a lot of info, but looking at a static map and looking at the area in game isn't that easy often, especially in a dungeon such as this.

When people talk about the "feeling" they remember in EQ, I argue it is things like this they are talking about. It is the risk and reward, the mystery and scale of such a dungeon, the progression over levels in a single area. This is what people miss and this is what "convenience" took away from the game and why people can't seem to find that "feeling" they had in EQ.

One last comment about zones being invalidated over levels. Look at this dungeon, this is what I am talking about as it concerns "striping" of content in a zone. Notice how in a single major dungeon it consists of levels from 4-50? Remember, this is one of the first dungeons from the original release where the level cap was 50. A single dungeon among 50 zones of content to explore. If you continue to layer new level caps and content within these zones as you release expansions, it can keep old content alive for a much longer time.

Ahhh,good old Guk. If you want to talk about intense lets talk about soloing Dead side as a level 50 necromancer. Good times

 

[belowmecoldhands]

(....)
Leveling in EQ took a VERY long time. So, by the time, a group who had spent quite a bit of time in Guk was nearing the cap of the dungeon, they knew it like the back of their hand (more so those who did the scouting and pulling). Maps as you see above were a "convenience", a helper tool, not a means for navigation for those unfamiliar with the area. If you didn't know the zone, the map would help in simpler dungeon designs, but in complex ones such as Guk where there secret walls, hidden pits that drop to other levels, etc... it had its limitations, an offline map a such would give you a basic feel, you still had to learn the dungeon by physical sight. The dungeons were too dangerous to idle too long in a non-safe spot.
(...)

Guk was not the only dungeon EQ. Obviously, it's distinguished among them, but there were many with interesting twists or turns. A lot of the dungeons in EQ you had to learn. It took time. You died. You levelled. You had moments of frustration. It felt great.

I quoted what you wrote there because it's important. I bolded the important part. See, in the rush to give (convenient) in-game maps for everything, as well as showing where you and your party members are, they had to "dumb down" the maps somewhat. EQ's map viewer did allow you to view "depth," but it was far from effective. Truly 3d dungeon were still a headache for anyone using it. Thus, there was a clear need for designers of the zones to make them viewer-friendly. This means more 2d-maps which're less twisting and turning. This is probably why, even today, Guk is stil special.

The problem Xenich, is these kind of maps DO cause frustrations, even for me. I prefer them. I loved EQ. But I did get frustrated sometimes! And this is hte problem, especially for new players who're entering a zone for the first time and don't care about the journey. Players demand convenience moreso than anything else. Things like this get axed first before everything else because it also saves time. Why create a more complex or deep dungeon when you can just create a flatter one????? It makes sense.

The dungeons in Daggerfall are random, but in many ways they parallel this discussion. I always enjoyed Daggerfalls dungeons. They had a bad habit of every place looking similar, but other than that, they had lots of twist and turns. But most players did not. Unfortunately, or not, people like me are rare. Most players want flatter or linear dungeons to traverse for convenience reasons.

MANY times in EQ, Xenich, sadly, I had discussions with players who complained about "maze-like" zones. They were specifically referring to zones like Guk. Guk isn't the only one, but I remember them all fondly. I always managed to keep my cool in-game and never try to insult anybody if they disagre with me. But in forums it's much harder for me to keep my opinions to myself. Honestly, a couple times in-game i felt like responding "hey I love those kinds of zone, so speak for yourself."

This discussion is much more ominous. It reflects on everything, not just maps. It also reflects on items and npcs and progression. It's the impetus behind making every development choice equal so a player can't make a bad choice. It's the reason for putting important things everywhere, so a player never has to backtrack or go to a different place for something. It's the main reason, in my opinion at least, environments and progression can feel stale. It's too safe... or too uninteresting.

They say it's convenience and "making it fun", but it's boring to me. It might work for 90% players, but not me. If I enjoy something and someone else hates it.... what am I to conclude? Does it relate to my OCD?

 

[Froglok]

Did someone mention Guk?

 

[belowmecoldhands]

I don't think anybody is arguing for small zones. I was just pointing out that a large zone can feel small because of travel speed.


MMO's do attract a special breed of OCD and argumentative habits but I guess that comes with the territory.

Well I can forget getting a high Explorer score in Bartles tes. I do think OCD is a likely candidate explanation.

But I don't just want travel times to be slower to increase the feling of largenes, I want the envirionment to be rich. Lots of NPCS and factions and quest and loots and places. West Karana was a very empty zone. NOT what I want.

Maybe it's some masochism too. Maybe frustrration ("akk! I fell down the trap and died!") is an addiction for some players? Maybe I need to be like "Where do I go next? Damnit!" in order to enjoy the gmae. Most gamers don't need frustration.

 

[vonAchdorf]

MANY times in EQ, Xenich, sadly, I had discussions with players who complained about "maze-like" zones. They were specifically referring to zones like Guk. Guk isn't the only one, but I remember them all fondly. I always managed to keep my cool in-game and never try to insult anybody if they disagre with me. But in forums it's much harder for me to keep my opinions to myself. Honestly, a couple times in-game i felt like responding "hey I love those kinds of zone, so speak for yourself."

This discussion is much more ominous. It reflects on everything, not just maps. It also reflects on items and npcs and progression. It's the impetus behind making every development choice equal so a player can't make a bad choice. It's the reason for putting important things everywhere, so a player never has to backtrack or go to a different place for something. It's the main reason, in my opinion at least, environments and progression can feel stale. It's too safe... or too uninteresting.

They say it's convenience and "making it fun", but it's boring to me. It might work for 90% players, but not me. If I enjoy something and someone else hates it.... what am I to conclude? Does it relate to my OCD?

EQ had those dungeons with LDoN and guess what, the most memorable thing about that expansion was sitting at the camp, chatting with people before the dungeon was ready.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

MANY times in EQ, Xenich, sadly, I had discussions with players who complained about "maze-like" zones. They were specifically referring to zones like Guk. Guk isn't the only one, but I remember them all fondly. I always managed to keep my cool in-game and never try to insult anybody if they disagre with me. But in forums it's much harder for me to keep my opinions to myself. Honestly, a couple times in-game i felt like responding "hey I love those kinds of zone, so speak for yourself."

This discussion is much more ominous. It reflects on everything, not just maps. It also reflects on items and npcs and progression. It's the impetus behind making every development choice equal so a player can't make a bad choice. It's the reason for putting important things everywhere, so a player never has to backtrack or go to a different place for something. It's the main reason, in my opinion at least, environments and progression can feel stale. It's too safe... or too uninteresting.

They say it's convenience and "making it fun", but it's boring to me. It might work for 90% players, but not me. If I enjoy something and someone else hates it.... what am I to conclude? Does it relate to my OCD?

EQ had those dungeons with LDoN and guess what, the most memorable thing about that expansion was sitting at the camp, chatting with people before the dungeon was ready.

Sory of what I remember of ldon those dungeons were not the same. They were much more linear, with only a couple branches, and much flatter. I did play a good amount of ldon in my time. LDONs were fun, but moreso because of thegroup.

I didn't like instances though and still don't. Actually, I hate them. Sems like everybody wants instances now. Reason I don't like them s because I like to bump into other players. I had many good moments in EQ. It's more social.

Some trivia: LDON was one of hte expansions I bought which wans't part of a larger package.

 

[Xenich]

The problem Xenich, is these kind of maps DO cause frustrations, even for me. I prefer them. I loved EQ. But I did get frustrated sometimes! And this is hte problem, especially for new players who're entering a zone for the first time and don't care about the journey. Players demand convenience moreso than anything else. Things like this get axed first before everything else because it also saves time. Why create a more complex or deep dungeon when you can just create a flatter one????? It makes sense.

See, I think healthy frustration (ie losing) is a natural response to failing to overcome a difficult obstacle. If you aren't frustrated, you aren't likely losing very often and if you aren't losing very often you aren't being challenged AND if a game isn't challenging, it becomes an exercise in mundane entertainment. So, what do people want? Do they want to be entertained? Or do they want to play a game? See, you lose in games and you have to keep trying to learn to succeed. This is what a game is, that is the main point of a game. That is why I like to play games. If I want simple entertainment, I watch a movie or read a book.

Now there is a thing called "unhealthy" frustration and this is borne of poor design. It is the result of the player being punished for things out of their control (ie the game cheats, a person dies due to a bug, etc...). That is unhealthy frustration. That I agree should be avoided. What you describe is not unhealthy frustration. It is a frustration as a result to player disregard to their risks/rewards of their environment. That is, they want to be entertained, not play a game. So, anytime there is effort or attention to skill required, they get frustrated. That is, their frustration isn't due to poor design, or to an unfair element of play, but rather it is due to their disregard of the game play elements.

Like I described in my Guk example, you had to learn the dungeons. It took time and that time and effort to learn an area paid off. You could be overly cautious, minimizing your risk, but... this meant reduced rewards as those who were willing to move in further often found the better names or even better camp spots that nobody else had found. With such risk, there was always backfires. Nobody likes to fail, but fail is an important part of success. You can now happiness without sadness. There is no game if there is no losing and those who find any sort of loss unhealthy frustration should go back to watching movies and reading books. They don't have the right mannerism for playing a game. /shrug

Most players want flatter or linear dungeons to traverse for convenience reasons.

Sure, and for them... there are numerous games out there that cater to such. Keep in mind, this game isn't being made for "most", rather its attention is for the "some".

MANY times in EQ, Xenich, sadly, I had discussions with players who complained about "maze-like" zones. They were specifically referring to zones like Guk. Guk isn't the only one, but I remember them all fondly. I always managed to keep my cool in-game and never try to insult anybody if they disagre with me. But in forums it's much harder for me to keep my opinions to myself. Honestly, a couple times in-game i felt like responding "hey I love those kinds of zone, so speak for yourself."

Some don't like playing games. Guk wasn't hard if you took the time to learn it. The people who got frustrated were often the ones who took no time to learn it. It was usually the ones who never even attempted Upper Guk and then once they hit 30+ would try to run to the Lower Guk Zone in. Without talking time to figure out the zone they would get lost, lose their invis and die, or die trying to make a break for the zone. I had to lead many a person to the Lower Guk entrance because they refused to learn that zone. Like I said, some people don't like playing games, they like to win under the conditions they accept (ie they just want to be entertained).

This discussion is much more ominous. It reflects on everything, not just maps. It also reflects on items and npcs and progression. It's the impetus behind making every development choice equal so a player can't make a bad choice. It's the reason for putting important things everywhere, so a player never has to backtrack orgo to a different place. It's the main reason, in my opinion at least, envrionments feel stale.

A player can't make a bad choice? Honestly, when I read things like this, it makes me think you never played EQ. What you claimed is a blatant falsehood in EQ.

 

[Xenich]

MANY times in EQ, Xenich, sadly, I had discussions with players who complained about "maze-like" zones. They were specifically referring to zones like Guk. Guk isn't the only one, but I remember them all fondly. I always managed to keep my cool in-game and never try to insult anybody if they disagre with me. But in forums it's much harder for me to keep my opinions to myself. Honestly, a couple times in-game i felt like responding "hey I love those kinds of zone, so speak for yourself."

This discussion is much more ominous. It reflects on everything, not just maps. It also reflects on items and npcs and progression. It's the impetus behind making every development choice equal so a player can't make a bad choice. It's the reason for putting important things everywhere, so a player never has to backtrack or go to a different place for something. It's the main reason, in my opinion at least, environments and progression can feel stale. It's too safe... or too uninteresting.

They say it's convenience and "making it fun", but it's boring to me. It might work for 90% players, but not me. If I enjoy something and someone else hates it.... what am I to conclude? Does it relate to my OCD?

EQ had those dungeons with LDoN and guess what, the most memorable thing about that expansion was sitting at the camp, chatting with people before the dungeon was ready.

LOL yep. LDON was horrible and the beginning of mundane dungeon grind runs.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Sory of what I remember of ldon those dungeons were not the same. They were much more linear, with only a couple branches, and much flatter. I did play a good amount of ldon in my time. LDONs were fun, but moreso because of thegroup.

I didn't like instances though and still don't. Actually, I hate them. Sems like everybody wants instances now. Reason I don't like them s because I like to bump into other players. I had many good moments in EQ. It's more social.

Some trivia: LDON was one of hte expansions I bought which wans't part of a larger package.

Yes, I meant LDoN where the "convenient" linear dungeons and therefore not as interesting as Guk. It's pretty much the precursor to today's dungeon finder speed runs.

 

[Xenich]

Sory of what I remember of ldon those dungeons were not the same. They were much more linear, with only a couple branches, and much flatter. I did play a good amount of ldon in my time. LDONs were fun, but moreso because of thegroup.

I didn't like instances though and still don't. Actually, I hate them. Sems like everybody wants instances now. Reason I don't like them s because I like to bump into other players. I had many good moments in EQ. It's more social.

Some trivia: LDON was one of hte expansions I bought.

LDoNs were hated by most of the player base. People ran them because it was the new thing to do and if it wasn't for the fact that many learned how to gimmick run them quickly, people wouldn't have even bothered. LDoN is everything EQ is not, it was an attempt to market off the "instancing" concept that was becoming popular at the time (lots of hype during WoWs alpha/beta). It was a suprise that Sony even bothered with such considering AO received a shit ton of flack for the problems with generated dungeon content. When I think of LDoN, I think of mainstream.

edit:

I was being an ass on that last part I removed. Disregard.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

This discussion is much more ominous. It reflects on everything, not just maps. It also reflects on items and npcs and progression. It's the impetus behind making every development choice equal so a player can't make a bad choice. It's the reason for putting important things everywhere, so a player never has to backtrack orgo to a different place. It's the main reason, in my opinion at least, envrionments feel stale.

A player can't make a bad choice? Honestly, when I read things like this, it makes me think you never played EQ. What you claimed is a blatant falsehood in EQ.

I wasn't speaking of EQ specifically, but of all games or mmoRPGS. IT's not just maps where you see this slimming down to appeal to player frustrations. I gave xamples: items, npcs, progression. Anything which produces frustration, like going down hte wrong development path or going to a city which doesn't have item X. If enough players demand a fix, it eventually becomes commonplace. Games can feel stale or too safe in a lot of ways, not just their maps. That's what I was trying to say with that quote.

Say you take a wrong turn on a map and get lost? Or get killed? Or can't buy an item you want without crossing to the other side of the world? You get frustrated, right? Well, what if you making a similarly bad choice in developing your character? Or maybe you're having a hard time finding a good item or a good quest? You get frustrated. The game starts to hold your hand so you don't get frustrated. THAT'S what I am saying I don't like. Too much hand holding. Too much overprotection.

I believe in rewarding smart decisions or preparedness, not necessarily grind. Grind is tricky because I think its meaning can be twisted and/or confused. I think weall genrally know hat grind is. I'm no friend to grind. But the problem is years and years of discussing/reading/watching/etc has made me cautious about this. Some grind is probably not preventable.

 

[Xenich]

This discussion is much more ominous. It reflects on everything, not just maps. It also reflects on items and npcs and progression. It's the impetus behind making every development choice equal so a player can't make a bad choice. It's the reason for putting important things everywhere, so a player never has to backtrack orgo to a different place. It's the main reason, in my opinion at least, envrionments feel stale.

A player can't make a bad choice? Honestly, when I read things like this, it makes me think you never played EQ. What you claimed is a blatant falsehood in EQ.

I wasn't speaking of EQ specifically, but of all games or mmoRPGS. IT's not just maps where you see this slimming down to appeal to player frustrations. I gave xamples: items, npcs, progression. Anything which produces frustration, like going down hte wrong development path or going to a city which doesn't have item X. If enough players demand a fix, it eventually becomes commonplace. Games can feel stale or too safe in a lot of ways, not just their maps. That's what I was trying to say with that quote.

Oh, ok... I misunderstood then.

Yes, this goes back to my point about two types of people who play games. One is a gamer, who enjoys playing a game and its systems. The other is just a person who wants to be entertained, play in a virtual world like... The SIMS. Since the latter is the largest market, that is what all games are being made for. That is, they aren't games, but just "entertainment" all about subjective meaningless things such as "fun" and "enjoyment" and other happy fluffy pointless words. It is why playing most games these days feels like you are giving yourself a lobotomy.