One point of contention though, I really don't like the idea of modifying the enemies to fit the players. I want the enemies I face to be within a factor, known or unknown "at present." I want to know what I've beaten or lost to, and be able to judge my progress based on that. Otherwise, it's a world that's "made to order", and feels gamey rather than interesting.
This i important for me. Bears don't know me from Crocodile Dundee. Monsters in games shouldn't either.
"We beat a Dragon!" now means nothing. No one else will be able to beat "your dragon." Because it was tailor made for you, and only you.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Well it is not abused by players,no system is abused by players if it is as intended or done well.How often do we see design issues where it looks like no testing or thought at all was put into them?I mean if players are so easily finding the issues/exploits what have the dev teams been doing,do they have any quality control,any testing,do they listen to feedback?
Anthem is a poor example for anything because that was a lazy game design,a lazy effort,just a big business operation using it's clout to promote a crap game,similar to promoting a game that is tagged with a brand,like Star Wars or Warcraft or Final Fantasy.
Game design over the past 10 years seems to be more about an assembly line ordeal,toss in onto the belt and get er done as fast as possible with no care for it's quality of design systems.
It is as simple as the AI system being done well.ANY form of scaling is garbage so that is not a good idea for an AI system.I think i mentioned it already,but yeah it would take a bit of effort put into each database but not really that difficult,just too much usually for the lazy developers i have been witnessing. @above poster,let's hear YOUR ideas rather than insult others...afraid or don't have any design ideas?No problem disagreeing with others ideas,that should be expected but to just say BS and not offer anything at all is very lame and leans towards you not actually having anything yourself to offer.
I agree that Anthem was not a great game, but it was a good example of trying these kinds of systems where there is some AI trying to scale the encounters to the players, and it did a great job of showcasing some of the glaring problems that exist in those kinds of ideas, and how players respond to many game ideas and how willing they are to try and game the systems.
I believe the line is "The best laid plans"
That it can be done badly hardly means that it cannot be done well.
For scaling difficulty, I prefer giving players a difficulty slider and letting them put it wherever they want. If they set it too high or too low, it's their own fault.
DDO does this already, the best of any MMO so far to date, IMHO. In fact, they started with Solo, Normal, Hard and Elite, difficulties and, get this, 'Solo' was in fact, Solo, where you had to go in alone.
Then they changed it to Casual, Normal, Hard, and Elite.
Then, they added in a tier of difficulty called "Reaper" with tiers 1 - 10, for their Veteran Hardcore players that have been around for years and needed a renewed challenge.
I often wonder why other games did not adopt this system, given that it seems to be exactly what people seem to want in an MMO.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
One point of contention though, I really don't like the idea of modifying the enemies to fit the players. I want the enemies I face to be within a factor, known or unknown "at present." I want to know what I've beaten or lost to, and be able to judge my progress based on that. Otherwise, it's a world that's "made to order", and feels gamey rather than interesting.
This i important for me. Bears don't know me from Crocodile Dundee. Monsters in games shouldn't either.
"We beat a Dragon!" now means nothing. No one else will be able to beat "your dragon." Because it was tailor made for you, and only you.
So long as it's only modification before the dungeon starts rather than modifying things in the middle of a dungeon, you could think of it as different dungeons have different monsters, and the players were assigned to take on the monsters in this one rather than that one.
Well it is not abused by players,no system is abused by players if it is as intended or done well.How often do we see design issues where it looks like no testing or thought at all was put into them?I mean if players are so easily finding the issues/exploits what have the dev teams been doing,do they have any quality control,any testing,do they listen to feedback?
Anthem is a poor example for anything because that was a lazy game design,a lazy effort,just a big business operation using it's clout to promote a crap game,similar to promoting a game that is tagged with a brand,like Star Wars or Warcraft or Final Fantasy.
Game design over the past 10 years seems to be more about an assembly line ordeal,toss in onto the belt and get er done as fast as possible with no care for it's quality of design systems.
It is as simple as the AI system being done well.ANY form of scaling is garbage so that is not a good idea for an AI system.I think i mentioned it already,but yeah it would take a bit of effort put into each database but not really that difficult,just too much usually for the lazy developers i have been witnessing. @above poster,let's hear YOUR ideas rather than insult others...afraid or don't have any design ideas?No problem disagreeing with others ideas,that should be expected but to just say BS and not offer anything at all is very lame and leans towards you not actually having anything yourself to offer.
I agree that Anthem was not a great game, but it was a good example of trying these kinds of systems where there is some AI trying to scale the encounters to the players, and it did a great job of showcasing some of the glaring problems that exist in those kinds of ideas, and how players respond to many game ideas and how willing they are to try and game the systems.
I believe the line is "The best laid plans"
That it can be done badly hardly means that it cannot be done well.
For scaling difficulty, I prefer giving players a difficulty slider and letting them put it wherever they want. If they set it too high or too low, it's their own fault.
DDO does this already, the best of any MMO so far to date, IMHO. In fact, they started with Solo, Normal, Hard and Elite, difficulties and, get this, 'Solo' was in fact, Solo, where you had to go in alone.
Then they changed it to Casual, Normal, Hard, and Elite.
Then, they added in a tier of difficulty called "Reaper" with tiers 1 - 10, for their Veteran Hardcore players that have been around for years and needed a renewed challenge.
I often wonder why other games did not adopt this system, given that it seems to be exactly what people seem to want in an MMO.
Difficulty scaling on works in closed environments. Isn't DDO basically a lobby based MMORPG?
Well it is not abused by players,no system is abused by players if it is as intended or done well.How often do we see design issues where it looks like no testing or thought at all was put into them?I mean if players are so easily finding the issues/exploits what have the dev teams been doing,do they have any quality control,any testing,do they listen to feedback?
Anthem is a poor example for anything because that was a lazy game design,a lazy effort,just a big business operation using it's clout to promote a crap game,similar to promoting a game that is tagged with a brand,like Star Wars or Warcraft or Final Fantasy.
Game design over the past 10 years seems to be more about an assembly line ordeal,toss in onto the belt and get er done as fast as possible with no care for it's quality of design systems.
It is as simple as the AI system being done well.ANY form of scaling is garbage so that is not a good idea for an AI system.I think i mentioned it already,but yeah it would take a bit of effort put into each database but not really that difficult,just too much usually for the lazy developers i have been witnessing. @above poster,let's hear YOUR ideas rather than insult others...afraid or don't have any design ideas?No problem disagreeing with others ideas,that should be expected but to just say BS and not offer anything at all is very lame and leans towards you not actually having anything yourself to offer.
I agree that Anthem was not a great game, but it was a good example of trying these kinds of systems where there is some AI trying to scale the encounters to the players, and it did a great job of showcasing some of the glaring problems that exist in those kinds of ideas, and how players respond to many game ideas and how willing they are to try and game the systems.
I believe the line is "The best laid plans"
That it can be done badly hardly means that it cannot be done well.
For scaling difficulty, I prefer giving players a difficulty slider and letting them put it wherever they want. If they set it too high or too low, it's their own fault.
DDO does this already, the best of any MMO so far to date, IMHO. In fact, they started with Solo, Normal, Hard and Elite, difficulties and, get this, 'Solo' was in fact, Solo, where you had to go in alone.
Then they changed it to Casual, Normal, Hard, and Elite.
Then, they added in a tier of difficulty called "Reaper" with tiers 1 - 10, for their Veteran Hardcore players that have been around for years and needed a renewed challenge.
I often wonder why other games did not adopt this system, given that it seems to be exactly what people seem to want in an MMO.
Difficulty scaling on works in closed environments. Isn't DDO basically a lobby based MMORPG?
Kinda, but that is the best environment for anyone that wants difficulty scaling. I mean really, difficulty scaling is not going to work for an Open World environment, unless you expect the same bear to hit one player like a ton of bricks and another player like a pillow.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Well it is not abused by players,no system is abused by players if it is as intended or done well.How often do we see design issues where it looks like no testing or thought at all was put into them?I mean if players are so easily finding the issues/exploits what have the dev teams been doing,do they have any quality control,any testing,do they listen to feedback?
Anthem is a poor example for anything because that was a lazy game design,a lazy effort,just a big business operation using it's clout to promote a crap game,similar to promoting a game that is tagged with a brand,like Star Wars or Warcraft or Final Fantasy.
Game design over the past 10 years seems to be more about an assembly line ordeal,toss in onto the belt and get er done as fast as possible with no care for it's quality of design systems.
It is as simple as the AI system being done well.ANY form of scaling is garbage so that is not a good idea for an AI system.I think i mentioned it already,but yeah it would take a bit of effort put into each database but not really that difficult,just too much usually for the lazy developers i have been witnessing. @above poster,let's hear YOUR ideas rather than insult others...afraid or don't have any design ideas?No problem disagreeing with others ideas,that should be expected but to just say BS and not offer anything at all is very lame and leans towards you not actually having anything yourself to offer.
I agree that Anthem was not a great game, but it was a good example of trying these kinds of systems where there is some AI trying to scale the encounters to the players, and it did a great job of showcasing some of the glaring problems that exist in those kinds of ideas, and how players respond to many game ideas and how willing they are to try and game the systems.
I believe the line is "The best laid plans"
That it can be done badly hardly means that it cannot be done well.
For scaling difficulty, I prefer giving players a difficulty slider and letting them put it wherever they want. If they set it too high or too low, it's their own fault.
DDO does this already, the best of any MMO so far to date, IMHO. In fact, they started with Solo, Normal, Hard and Elite, difficulties and, get this, 'Solo' was in fact, Solo, where you had to go in alone.
Then they changed it to Casual, Normal, Hard, and Elite.
Then, they added in a tier of difficulty called "Reaper" with tiers 1 - 10, for their Veteran Hardcore players that have been around for years and needed a renewed challenge.
I often wonder why other games did not adopt this system, given that it seems to be exactly what people seem to want in an MMO.
Difficulty scaling on works in closed environments. Isn't DDO basically a lobby based MMORPG?
Kinda, but that is the best environment for anyone that wants difficulty scaling. I mean really, difficulty scaling is not going to work for an Open World environment, unless you expect the same bear to hit one player like a ton of bricks and another player like a pillow.
Yeah, DDO is not an MMORPG outside of the Lobby. It's Multiplayer. Scaling is like mountain climbers changing the height of Mt. Everest. It robs it of the identity and interest it should have.
I do think a good game should have some dungeons and other places with the typical static spawn for the kind of relaxed (after work, just screwing around) game play like that. Various difficulties, getting stronger as you go deeper. And with common loot that NPC Shopkeepers buy in place of "kill 10 rats" quests.
Dungeons like that, Newb to semi-high skilled content as you delve into it's depths, and near the major beginner cities, could be sometimes taken over by a Wandering MOB, like the wilder Dungeons farther out in the world, and especially for GM Events. That would be very temporary and as a means to release info on a world-wide Event, that's how I'd think it would work best.
Personally, the Instance Dungeons of DDO, are the best of any game, and they fit the theme of a D&D game, where you go do a dungeon delve with your friends, and don't have to worry about the neighbours kids coming over, stealing your dice, drinking your mountain dew, and killing the boss mob.
The difficulty scaling makes it so that players can find a good challenge for their skill level, as opposed to having everyone try to fit a one-size-fits-all approach. That is why unlike every other game, DDO's has it so that it's raids and high level content is accessible to all of it's player base, while still maintaining a massively unhealthy elitist environment that everyone seems to love.
I will say, their instanced outdoor zones, could be more Open World, as they do not have difficulty settings, but their dungen design and work with it's difficulty settings.. best of any MMO ever made.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Personally, the Instance Dungeons of DDO, are the best of any game, and they fit the theme of a D&D game, where you go do a dungeon delve with your friends, and don't have to worry about the neighbours kids coming over, stealing your dice, drinking your mountain dew, and killing the boss mob.
The difficulty scaling makes it so that players can find a good challenge for their skill level, as opposed to having everyone try to fit a one-size-fits-all approach. That is why unlike every other game, DDO's has it so that it's raids and high level content is accessible to all of it's player base, while still maintaining a massively unhealthy elitist environment that everyone seems to love.
I will say, their instanced outdoor zones, could be more Open World, as they do not have difficulty settings, but their dungen design and work with it's difficulty settings.. best of any MMO ever made.
I understand that. It's just not the game world I want. But to my thinking, there are ways to solve all those issues they solved, at that time, in that way, and still have ONE World open to all. It does require a huge, massive world though. Cameltosis' post about procedurally generated worlds earlier in this thread is critical to all of this.
For example, why does the main loot of a BOSS have to be on it's corpse? Why does everyone get access to the loot when it was a certain few who did the work to open the way to said BOSS? Couldn't that BOSS be locked behind (any sort of) seal, and the guys who figure out the how, also get the means to gain the BOSS Loot? A locked vault or teleporter or whatever, that only allows that particular group access. (I'm thinking in-game contracts here, too. A legal "league", so to speak) The game design should still have plenty of great loot for all the players involved. Just separate out the big reward and hold it for that particular group who made the discoveries that les to that BOSS.
Think of the great Quests, long term and multiple discovery, in a realistic, Open Worldly fashion, that can be had. And talk about fame, and heroic stature earned!
For example, why does the main loot of a BOSS have to be on it's corpse? Why does everyone get access to the loot when it was a certain few who did the work to open the way to said BOSS? Couldn't that BOSS be locked behind (any sort of) seal, and the guys who figure out the how, also get the means to gain the BOSS Loot? A locked vault or teleporter or whatever, that only allows that particular group access. (I'm thinking in-game contracts here, too. A legal "league", so to speak)
A system that allows only a particular group access to the boss? That's a great invention, I think we should call it an instance.
For example, why does the main loot of a BOSS have to be on it's corpse? Why does everyone get access to the loot when it was a certain few who did the work to open the way to said BOSS? Couldn't that BOSS be locked behind (any sort of) seal, and the guys who figure out the how, also get the means to gain the BOSS Loot? A locked vault or teleporter or whatever, that only allows that particular group access. (I'm thinking in-game contracts here, too. A legal "league", so to speak)
A system that allows only a particular group access to the boss? That's a great invention, I think we should call it an instance.
The other issue (it may not be a problem to some) is that any non-instanced mechanism to allow access to a boss' loot would empower the spoiler sites even more. People don't play games to solve puzzles; they resort to spoiler sites when faced with a puzzle. Plus, such a mechanism would surely attract those intent on cheating the system.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
For example, why does the main loot of a BOSS have to be on it's corpse? Why does everyone get access to the loot when it was a certain few who did the work to open the way to said BOSS? Couldn't that BOSS be locked behind (any sort of) seal, and the guys who figure out the how, also get the means to gain the BOSS Loot? A locked vault or teleporter or whatever, that only allows that particular group access. (I'm thinking in-game contracts here, too. A legal "league", so to speak)
A system that allows only a particular group access to the boss? That's a great invention, I think we should call it an instance.
That's not what I said. Or at least trying to relate. If the BOSS is locked away in a secret chamber, and a group of players find out how to open it, and every other player around can join in, but A SPECIFIC SPECIAL REWARD is locked away in a nearby location/vault, that only the party who unlocked the BOSS can access.... Then everyone gets to fight the BOSS, and loot it's corpse and that room. But only the group that opened the way can then open the vault and gain that special loot.
Am I getting that point across?
That was just an example. The Devs could very easily go the easy route, and only give a SPECIAL LOOT REWARD off the BOSS corpse to that group of players. That's been done before.
I'm just saying that a game does not have to be Instanced.
For example, why does the main loot of a BOSS have to be on it's corpse? Why does everyone get access to the loot when it was a certain few who did the work to open the way to said BOSS? Couldn't that BOSS be locked behind (any sort of) seal, and the guys who figure out the how, also get the means to gain the BOSS Loot? A locked vault or teleporter or whatever, that only allows that particular group access. (I'm thinking in-game contracts here, too. A legal "league", so to speak)
A system that allows only a particular group access to the boss? That's a great invention, I think we should call it an instance.
The other issue (it may not be a problem to some) is that any non-instanced mechanism to allow access to a boss' loot would empower the spoiler sites even more. People don't play games to solve puzzles; they resort to spoiler sites when faced with a puzzle. Plus, such a mechanism would surely attract those intent on cheating the system.
I'm thinking in terms of world wide, one off, quests inside an Open WORLD. That particular example was in thinking with GM Events.
I don't want rinse and repeat game play. It sucks and is loaded with problems that prevent an interesting game. Prevents MMORPGs from being what they can be.
Now I know there are a lot of gamers who expect to be handed all of everything, even running on script and half awake. Sorry, that game is boring.
For example, why does the main loot of a BOSS have to be on it's corpse? Why does everyone get access to the loot when it was a certain few who did the work to open the way to said BOSS? Couldn't that BOSS be locked behind (any sort of) seal, and the guys who figure out the how, also get the means to gain the BOSS Loot? A locked vault or teleporter or whatever, that only allows that particular group access. (I'm thinking in-game contracts here, too. A legal "league", so to speak)
A system that allows only a particular group access to the boss? That's a great invention, I think we should call it an instance.
The other issue (it may not be a problem to some) is that any non-instanced mechanism to allow access to a boss' loot would empower the spoiler sites even more. People don't play games to solve puzzles; they resort to spoiler sites when faced with a puzzle. Plus, such a mechanism would surely attract those intent on cheating the system.
I'm thinking in terms of world wide, one off, quests inside an Open WORLD. That particular example was in thinking with GM Events.
I don't want rinse and repeat game play. It sucks and is loaded with problems that prevent an interesting game. Prevents MMORPGs from being what they can be.
Now I know there are a lot of gamers who expect to be handed all of everything, even running on script and half awake. Sorry, that game is boring.
I would like RPGs to move away from their reliance on quests.
Some quests have great storylines and unique mechanics to back up that storyline and keep it interesting. But in my experience, the overwhelming majority of quests are just generic text and a pointer to where you need to kill stuff. It's like instead of us, the players, choosing to explore the world and kill what's out there, we need someone else to tell us to do the exact same thing. I don't understand it personally.
When I was talking about procedurally generated worlds and better scripting to control the world, there are a couple of key reasons for thinking about such a system.
The first is variety, and this is what procedural generation has the capability to do. We hear, time and again, how time consuming and expensive it is to make large, open worlds with decent detail. With the correct rule and assets, that hand-crafting is removed and loads of time is saved. For example, I didn't like Skyrim that much. I liked some of the systems, but I found the bleak, snowy landscape a drag. So, instead of spending all that time building the world by hand, a team could have been developing procedural scripts to build the world. Then, all they have to do is feed in new assets and a new "seed", and with minimal effort you've got an entirely new world to explore.
Apply that to MMOs. Instead of the ridiculous time and money spent building each zone, spend that time developing assets and scripts so that new zones/planets can be generated immediately. Perhaps each "server" could actually be limited in seeding values, so if you joined Server 1, you got access to planets 1-10, but if you joined Server 2, you have access to planets 11-20? It could add some much need variety, and also some real reasons to try out other servers, or to feel more attached to your own.
The second reason I made my post was about trying to improve the intrinsic motivation of players within an RPG. I feel we've spent too many years being conditioned to love the rewards or to feel good about checking off quests from a gigantic list. This has all come at the expense of the gameplay.
I feel that if the developers spent more time on the systems and gameplay, with more dynamic, changing worlds, then this would provide us more intrinsic motivation for actually playing the game.
For example, I start a new game and choose world 1234 to play in (procedurally generated). Upon exploration of this new world, I come across a town that I think looks really pretty and decide to make it my home. Instead of quests telling me what to do, there should be systems in place that allow me to take charge and kinda do what I want. So, I might visit the tavern, which is populated by procedurally generated NPCs who like out actual lives in the town. By interacting with them, they give me clues about the town (farmer X is having critter problems, the guard lost 3 men on a patrol, there's a rumour about the lords bastard son...). I can then start making personal decisions. Maybe I speak to the guards and follow the patrols route, find a monster and kill it, earning me a reward. This isn't a set quest with objectives and rewards. This is me choosing to take action and hoping for a reward.
The players actions then genuinely affect the game world. As a combat orientated player, maybe making a town my home means joining the local army and clearing the area of baddies, which in turn helps the town to grow through increased population and more trade. As a crafter, maybe I setup shop in the town, build a clientele from the NPCs. Maybe I can craft better armour than the NPC blacksmith, and so through my actions the town guard becomes better equiped and can beat more baddies, or maybe my food production methods mean the population of the town can grow quicker. Or maybe I care about politics, join the town council and am able to set policy, taxes etc, which in turn affect the way the town progresses.
This sort of approach is definitely not the norm. It is shifting the focus away from developer-driven story and towards player-driven story. It's using complicated systems and scripts to give the players the tools they need to really roleplay, you know, actually play the role they want, rather than act out a predefined script.
This approach is also harder than what we have now, because it is a lot more complicated. However, if you manage to get the talented people to do it, then it should (in the long run) be a lot cheaper.
Apologies for another wall of text from me, I don't seem to be able to help myself!
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Procedural quest are there to specifically to move away from repeat content. Maybe even bring consequence to ignored content. To allow for content to be more like clay than concrete.
You may go into a raid zone but the enemies you face change as bosses are defeated or overtime. Maybe an easy dungeon is cleared and is taken over by a raid level boss and minions. Next time it could be friendly.
Comments
"We beat a Dragon!" now means nothing. No one else will be able to beat "your dragon." Because it was tailor made for you, and only you.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Then they changed it to Casual, Normal, Hard, and Elite.
Then, they added in a tier of difficulty called "Reaper" with tiers 1 - 10, for their Veteran Hardcore players that have been around for years and needed a renewed challenge.
I often wonder why other games did not adopt this system, given that it seems to be exactly what people seem to want in an MMO.
Scaling is like mountain climbers changing the height of Mt. Everest. It robs it of the identity and interest it should have.
I do think a good game should have some dungeons and other places with the typical static spawn for the kind of relaxed (after work, just screwing around) game play like that. Various difficulties, getting stronger as you go deeper.
And with common loot that NPC Shopkeepers buy in place of "kill 10 rats" quests.
Dungeons like that, Newb to semi-high skilled content as you delve into it's depths, and near the major beginner cities, could be sometimes taken over by a Wandering MOB, like the wilder Dungeons farther out in the world, and especially for GM Events. That would be very temporary and as a means to release info on a world-wide Event, that's how I'd think it would work best.
Once upon a time....
The difficulty scaling makes it so that players can find a good challenge for their skill level, as opposed to having everyone try to fit a one-size-fits-all approach. That is why unlike every other game, DDO's has it so that it's raids and high level content is accessible to all of it's player base, while still maintaining a massively unhealthy elitist environment that everyone seems to love.
I will say, their instanced outdoor zones, could be more Open World, as they do not have difficulty settings, but their dungen design and work with it's difficulty settings.. best of any MMO ever made.
But to my thinking, there are ways to solve all those issues they solved, at that time, in that way, and still have ONE World open to all.
It does require a huge, massive world though.
Cameltosis' post about procedurally generated worlds earlier in this thread is critical to all of this.
For example, why does the main loot of a BOSS have to be on it's corpse? Why does everyone get access to the loot when it was a certain few who did the work to open the way to said BOSS?
Couldn't that BOSS be locked behind (any sort of) seal, and the guys who figure out the how, also get the means to gain the BOSS Loot? A locked vault or teleporter or whatever, that only allows that particular group access. (I'm thinking in-game contracts here, too. A legal "league", so to speak)
The game design should still have plenty of great loot for all the players involved. Just separate out the big reward and hold it for that particular group who made the discoveries that les to that BOSS.
Think of the great Quests, long term and multiple discovery, in a realistic, Open Worldly fashion, that can be had. And talk about fame, and heroic stature earned!
Once upon a time....
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
If the BOSS is locked away in a secret chamber, and a group of players find out how to open it, and every other player around can join in, but A SPECIFIC SPECIAL REWARD is locked away in a nearby location/vault, that only the party who unlocked the BOSS can access....
Then everyone gets to fight the BOSS, and loot it's corpse and that room.
But only the group that opened the way can then open the vault and gain that special loot.
Am I getting that point across?
That was just an example. The Devs could very easily go the easy route, and only give a SPECIAL LOOT REWARD off the BOSS corpse to that group of players. That's been done before.
I'm just saying that a game does not have to be Instanced.
Once upon a time....
I'm thinking in terms of world wide, one off, quests inside an Open WORLD.
That particular example was in thinking with GM Events.
I don't want rinse and repeat game play. It sucks and is loaded with problems that prevent an interesting game. Prevents MMORPGs from being what they can be.
Now I know there are a lot of gamers who expect to be handed all of everything, even running on script and half awake. Sorry, that game is boring.
Once upon a time....
You may go into a raid zone but the enemies you face change as bosses are defeated or overtime. Maybe an easy dungeon is cleared and is taken over by a raid level boss and minions. Next time it could be friendly.