Quote from: James J SkachNot being a WoW (or any of these) player, I'm curious.  While you are playing, do you run into other players in other groups? Is it by server?

Yes, there are other players in most places (and lots of other players at that). The exception are "instances" or dungeons where your group is the only one.

Do "instances" cost more? Are they your own?  Or is that when you get into a certain area you start to play on your own (group) but outside of that particular place you are back in the general populace? Can multple groups be in the same place, but be playing separately? If one group goes in and get the McGuffin, is it there for other groups?

Quote from: James J SkachDo "instances" cost more?

Not individually, but obviously some instances you can only access if you have particular expansions.

QuoteAre they your own?

They're not personalised, if that's what you mean. Everyone gets access to the same set of instances when they get the core game, and gets access to the same sets of extra instances when they get the expansions.

QuoteOr is that when you get into a certain area you start to play on your own (group) but outside of that particular place you are back in the general populace?

Yes.

QuoteCan multple groups be in the same place, but be playing separately?

Yes. They won't see each other, and it'll be as if the other groups don't exist.

QuoteIf one group goes in and get the McGuffin, is it there for other groups?

Yes.

Guild Wars uses instances to the best impact in that effectively the whole would outside the cities are a instance in which the only players are the group you're with.

However Guild Wars is primarily a PvP game, and the PVE instances and adventures serve to provide a back story and a method for leveling to PvP level. They have a lifespan as a result about equal to a normal computer/xbox game. It was also even more rail roaded than typical for a MMORPG. Course I'm a couple of expansions back so that information may be slightly out of date.

Additionally our family Guild War experience ran into a limit in that as one progressed in the storyline the need for larger and larger player groups increased until you had to have a full party for the final missions. That wasn't possible with just my extended family playing so joining a guild became necessary.


Still, Guild Wars does a lot right and I consider it one of the best MMORPGs on the market.


Instances in LotRO can be one of two types- individual per group (typically these are only for the Epic quest series), or shared with other groups. The latter are basically just sub-zones.

It should be noted however, that overuse of instancing in an MMO tends to lead to something of a backlash from the gamer audience, because basically at that point you're removing the persistent world and interaction element from the game and making it just another multiplayer PC game.

Guild Wars gets away with it by not charging for the service, but this has been a persistent negative response to games like Phantasy Star Online and D&D Online.

Quote from: J ArcaneIt should be noted however, that overuse of instancing in an MMO tends to lead to something of a backlash from the gamer audience, because basically at that point you're removing the persistent world and interaction element from the game and making it just another multiplayer PC game.

It should be noted that Persistence is basically non-existent in these games in the sense that most people think of it. Sure the stats and status of the character remains between sessions, but the just killed MOB will return so that the next player can whack on him (or you can in the endless grind for a rare drop).

Five years of EQ had gone by when I quit, and that stupid Gnoll was still charging the city gates...

Instancing in such a case can actually increase Persistence, as he can make changes to his instanced world without affecting the game of others. LotRO makes a single use of this when the newbie town of Archet is nearly burned down at the end of the intro quest series.

The actual drawbacks of too much instancing is more subtle... and underhanded. But you're correct that forced interaction is removed.

Quote from: BalbinusAlso, the point of roleplaying is not to tell a good story.  That's a point for some people, but it is not the point.

There is no the point.

For me, the point is to experience other lives and to hang out having fun with friends, others have other points, sometimes in the same group, but there is no single point.

For me creating story is a byproduct of play, and great play does not necessarily lead to great stories or indeed much of any story at all.

As so often, Mike Mearls is right on the money.

For me it's creating fun characters and have them interact in interesting and vibrant scenes, be it a gothic WoD lightning soaked mansion, or the Death Star. That isn't storytelling per se, but it's not wargaming. It's the twlight zone we call roleplaying - well maybe. Who knows!

It's also interacting with fun rules systems. I like rules, I like the way they work. I would no more want a game with a billion levels of nuclear powered complexity though than I would with none (like Over the Edge).
Calling something a storytelling, or a roleplaying, game is as pointless as changing the C in CCG to T, or changing Collectable Card Games to Customizable (sic) card games. Seems pointless to me.

Quote from: BalbinusCheetos are disgusting IMO, and funion is not a word.

At my table we eat fine cheeses and cured meats and drink wine and real ale.

and cake!