I much prefer smaller scale maps loaded with content, over large empty areas, which is usually what large maps end up being. As far as large maps go I am usually impressed by the size for about a week, after that it just means more ground to cover to get anything done.
Large maps aren't there for simple entertainment. They are a game play element that gives purpose to character development and ability. It makes classes who have port abilities, run speed increases, or various tools to safely traverse an area an asset. It is these layers upon layers of game play features that bring depth and worth to the game world as well as giving the world a massive feeling.
I have played both types of worlds and personally I find the tightly compacted ones to have an artificial feel.
I much prefer smaller scale maps loaded with content, over large empty areas, which is usually what large maps end up being. As far as large maps go I am usually impressed by the size for about a week, after that it just means more ground to cover to get anything done.
Large maps aren't there for simple entertainment. They are a game play element that gives purpose to character development and ability. It makes classes who have port abilities, run speed increases, or various tools to safely traverse an area an asset. It is these layers upon layers of game play features that bring depth and worth to the game world as well as giving the world a massive feeling.
I have played both types of worlds and personally I find the tightly compacted ones to have an artificial feel.
I don't disagree it does feel more artificial. SWG felt like a world simulator compared to ESO as an example. Yet in some ways that's not a bad thing in ESO's case. It's a matter of preference really. I view neither way as bad, more so it's a matter of pros and cons. SWG was good for a more baked in community involved atmosphere. ESO is good to play with a close friend/wife a few hours at a time. In this day and age I simply prefer the latter.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I much prefer smaller scale maps loaded with content, over large empty areas, which is usually what large maps end up being. As far as large maps go I am usually impressed by the size for about a week, after that it just means more ground to cover to get anything done.
Large maps aren't there for simple entertainment. They are a game play element that gives purpose to character development and ability. It makes classes who have port abilities, run speed increases, or various tools to safely traverse an area an asset. It is these layers upon layers of game play features that bring depth and worth to the game world as well as giving the world a massive feeling.
I have played both types of worlds and personally I find the tightly compacted ones to have an artificial feel.
I don't disagree it does feel more artificial. SWG felt like a world simulator compared to ESO as an example. Yet in some ways that's not a bad thing in ESO's case. It's a matter of preference really. I view neither way as bad, more so it's a matter of pros and cons. SWG was good for a more baked in community involved atmosphere. ESO is good to play with a close friend/wife a few hours at a time. In this day and age I simply prefer the latter.
Everything is a matter of taste (this isn't an issue of right/wrong), but as it concerns Pantheon, there is a specific focus they are trying to achieve and so a small zone with tightly packed content that people hop to in a line from one to the next is counter to the features that Pantheon is trying to achieve. Travel must mean something or all the tools become irrelevant and we are back to the mainstream designs of 5 min dungeon runs and people porting anywhere in the world within seconds.
But the best games you played probably havent been the best games because they had zones - right ?
Also MMOs are different than offline games. Living in a game world with thousands of other players is a very special experience, and seamless would help with that.
Makes also features like boats and flying mounts easier.
... I don't know of a single game that doesn't have some type of loading. Even older games like AC had loading screens when you went into a portal or recalled back to your bind point. ...
Yeah, but loading while starting the game or using magical teleportation isn't immersion-breaking.
I don't see the difference of either. It seems to me that some people just don't have enough to complain about. What I would consider immersion breaking would be a sublime green Lamborghini mount that drove past me at the giant fort.
But the best games you played probably havent been the best games because they had zones - right ?
Also MMOs are different than offline games. Living in a game world with thousands of other players is a very special experience, and seamless would help with that.
Makes also features like boats and flying mounts easier.
No such thing as seamless(no loading screens), every game has loading screens. Name one without it.
It won't hurt anything if the game is good. Zonining in EQ was kind of a minigame sometimes (getting away alive). Only spastic combat can hurt this game and as far as I know it won't be in it.
No such thing as seamless(no loading screens), every game has loading screens. Name one without it.
Hmm just one ?
Morrowind Oblivion Skyrim Lineage 2 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Probably many more.
Take your pick.
All of those games stop to load at some point during play. Perhaps they don't all have "screens", but somewhere there is a progress bar or text informing the player that they are loading. Vanguard, every time you chunked. All of the other games if you fast travel.
No such thing as seamless(no loading screens), every game has loading screens. Name one without it.
Hmm just one ?
Morrowind Oblivion Skyrim Lineage 2 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Probably many more.
Take your pick.
All of those games stop to load at some point during play. Perhaps they don't all have "screens", but somewhere there is a progress bar or text informing the player that they are loading. Vanguard, every time you chunked. All of the other games if you fast travel.
All true, but Adamantine got faked out by Niien moving the goalposts.
Every game freezes during startup, teleportation or fast travel, but that's largely irrelevant because those are extraordinary actions where one wouldn't expect physical continuity.
What IS immersion-breaking is the game locking up for 10+ seconds while you're just wandering around.
In any event, zoning isn't going to kill Pantheon, but it's going to make it less of a "living world" than the family of modern sandbox games (Archeage, Black Desert, Crowfall, Camelot Unchained, EQ:N, etc.) that are designed to be seamless in the WoW sense.
I think it was a huge mistake making Panties On with zones. A seamless world is the number one most important thing about an MMORPG to me and I know many others feel the same way. I actually stopped playing GW2 within the first hour after it launched long ago because of this and I never looked back.
No such thing as seamless(no loading screens), every game has loading screens. Name one without it.
Hmm just one ?
Morrowind Oblivion Skyrim Lineage 2 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Probably many more.
Take your pick.
All of those games stop to load at some point during play. Perhaps they
don't all have "screens", but somewhere there is a progress bar or text
informing the player that they are loading. Vanguard, every time you
chunked. All of the other games if you fast travel.
Haha, yeah you're right, I was abusing that you specifically said "no loading screens".
Obviously you cannot avoid loading screens with (a) starting the game and (b) free teleports.
However, you CAN run around in Morrowinds and Oblivions open worlds without ever seeing any loading screen anywhere. The only avoidable loading screens are dungeons. However the same techniques that they used to allow no loading in the open world would have also allowed to preload dungeons.
But the best games you played probably havent been the best games because they had zones - right ?
Also MMOs are different than offline games. Living in a game world with thousands of other players is a very special experience, and seamless would help with that.
Makes also features like boats and flying mounts easier.
I don't see why. I mean, I never really noticed the EQ zoning issue other than when I was running from a train of mobs or sitting right next to a dungeon zone in. It never really had an effect on the social experience. Keep in mind that EQ raids were as large as 72 people, so "Social" was certainly not an issue and if you ever walked through East Commons when they were selling, it was like a massive pile of people.
I never saw the big deal about seamless to be honest, I have played both and they had zero impact on my enjoyment of the game. I take that back, I actually enjoy zones better due to the mechanic of unleashed mobs, trains, etc... and to be honest, I kind of liked the thrill of the "zoning" when I was going into a new zone for the first time. Would there be mobs/guards right at the entrance? Would I get one shot? What would I expect? Some say the zoning was not immersive, but for me it was more so.
would be better if there was a system similar to Vanguard, but it was more clunky than chunky.
Agreed. Vanguards seamlessness left quite something to desire.
The best system to make a game seamless is to have relatively small chunks and always keep all 8 chunks - this assumes chunks are square - next to the current one in memory as well. Or all 6 chunks - if you use the somewhat more efficient honeycomb pattern.
This way, if a player crosses over to another chunk, one can load the adjacent chunks missing in the background, thus the player never actually notices that the world is split in chunks.
Finally you'll have to optimize this a bit more so players who run circles
around the spots where four chunks (or three, with the honeycomb
pattern) meet will not cause massive lag due to the fact you have to
keep loading the missing adjacent chunks, and then the player will never
see any loading screens.
I was always a bit annoyed that Vanguard didnt used this system. For example Morrowind already used it long before Vanguard was released.
Im fairly sure that was the plan, but they couldnt quite pull it off. I suspect that the memory reqs of the chunks grew beyond their ability to fit 9 into memory. Maybe they forgot to include memory reqs of the playercount in the chunks?
No such thing as seamless(no loading screens), every game has loading screens. Name one without it.
Hmm just one ?
Morrowind Oblivion Skyrim Lineage 2 Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Probably many more.
Take your pick.
All those games have loading screens. What's funny is the first three aren't even MMOs. Are we comparing single player vs massively multiplayer games now? Also none of the games are even remotely new. Why would we expect a game on a budget to be the only MMO out with no loading screens?
I think it was a huge mistake making Panties On with zones. A seamless world is the number one most important thing about an MMORPG to me and I know many others feel the same way. I actually stopped playing GW2 within the first hour after it launched long ago because of this and I never looked back.
Then you must not play any MMORPGS as there aren't any without loading. If you do please enlighten us all as to which one does.
Im fairly sure that was the plan, but they couldnt quite pull it off. I
suspect that the memory reqs of the chunks grew beyond their ability to
fit 9 into memory. Maybe they forgot to include memory reqs of the
playercount in the chunks?
Err Vanguards chunks have been far too big that more than one would ever fit into memory.
If you want to use the preloading scheme of Morrowind et al, you need to use fairly small chunks so you can hold 9 of them in memory without a problem.
Would you kindly not take a random posting from the whole thread and answer to
that despite the fact that conversation was going on beyond that point
already ? You're not telling anybody anything new.
Comments
Large maps aren't there for simple entertainment. They are a game play element that gives purpose to character development and ability. It makes classes who have port abilities, run speed increases, or various tools to safely traverse an area an asset. It is these layers upon layers of game play features that bring depth and worth to the game world as well as giving the world a massive feeling.
I have played both types of worlds and personally I find the tightly compacted ones to have an artificial feel.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The best games I ever played had zones. The whole "seamless" idea was great, but never felt any more real or made any game better to me.
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
Also MMOs are different than offline games. Living in a game world with thousands of other players is a very special experience, and seamless would help with that.
Makes also features like boats and flying mounts easier.
No such thing as seamless(no loading screens), every game has loading screens. Name one without it.
Morrowind
Oblivion
Skyrim
Lineage 2
Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Probably many more.
Take your pick.
All true, but Adamantine got faked out by Niien moving the goalposts.
Every game freezes during startup, teleportation or fast travel, but that's largely irrelevant because those are extraordinary actions where one wouldn't expect physical continuity.
What IS immersion-breaking is the game locking up for 10+ seconds while you're just wandering around.
In any event, zoning isn't going to kill Pantheon, but it's going to make it less of a "living world" than the family of modern sandbox games (Archeage, Black Desert, Crowfall, Camelot Unchained, EQ:N, etc.) that are designed to be seamless in the WoW sense.
Obviously you cannot avoid loading screens with (a) starting the game and (b) free teleports.
However, you CAN run around in Morrowinds and Oblivions open worlds without ever seeing any loading screen anywhere. The only avoidable loading screens are dungeons. However the same techniques that they used to allow no loading in the open world would have also allowed to preload dungeons.
I never saw the big deal about seamless to be honest, I have played both and they had zero impact on my enjoyment of the game. I take that back, I actually enjoy zones better due to the mechanic of unleashed mobs, trains, etc... and to be honest, I kind of liked the thrill of the "zoning" when I was going into a new zone for the first time. Would there be mobs/guards right at the entrance? Would I get one shot? What would I expect? Some say the zoning was not immersive, but for me it was more so.
Morrowind - Loading screens
Oblivion - Loading screens
Skyrim - Loading screens
Lineage 2 - Loading screens
Vanguard: Sage of Heroes - Loading screens
If you want to use the preloading scheme of Morrowind et al, you need to use fairly small chunks so you can hold 9 of them in memory without a problem.
Would you kindly not take a random posting from the whole thread and answer to that despite the fact that conversation was going on beyond that point already ? You're not telling anybody anything new.