[MUD-Dev] Instancing (was: MMORPG Cancellations...)

[Brad McQuaid]

On Thursday, July 15th, Raph Koster said:

> Well, I think instancing works fine for that sort of static
> content that is not intended to be impactful to the world
> state. But I see the future of the medium as [sic] impacting the
> world state, so...

Very well said Raph, and also yet another important indictment
against Instancing and its incompatibility with both the origins and
hopeful destination of traditional massively multiplayer online
games.

I realize there are many MMOGs out there experimenting with
Instancing to varying degrees.  A game like EQ can dabble with it
with one expansion (Ldon) and realize some success -- it both
offered a different style of gameplay (a good thing to introduce in
a successful, yet older MMOG) and also accounted for probably 5% or
less of the content of the greater game.  Games like AO, however,
seemed to have relied on it a bit too far and suffered in the area
of community building (this not only from observation, but also from
actual core team members, later realizing its harmful affects).
Other future MMOGs in development seem to be focusing even more
heavily on Instancing, to the point where I wonder if they really
are massively multiplayer games (or, at least, in the traditional
way).

Perhaps, if they are successful, they will actually create a new
genre of online games (and I sincerely wish them success -- a. our
industry needs no more failures, especially expensive ones,
b. they're really nice guys, and c. I'm also for the expansion of
'online' above and beyond the traditional).

All that said, in a traditional massively multiplayer game, with
time invested as the advancement mechanism, and (hopefully) player
interdependent game mechanics encouraging grouping, which then leads
to relationships, and builds community, Instancing simply doesn't
seem to fit.  Outside of supporting pre-existing social groups who
want to playing online by themselves and without interference from
others, it does little to further forming new friendships and
building community in general (indeed, it can be argued that it
harms community building).  These communities and relationships are
the glue that keep MMOGs together, and are key to player retention.
Eliminating players outside of those known to the pre-existing group
because they might interfere in some 'bad' way certainly does little
to help new friendships form.

Separating players from other players makes the gameworld seem much
less like a virtual reality or world -- no longer are you by chance
running across other groups of players, making it seem like you
truly are in a shared, real world.  Immsersiveness is damaged, and
the dream of escaping to another world that seems real harmed, to
say the least.

No longer are you saved at the last minute in a dungeon by
passers-by, who then later, because of their selfless acts, become
friends themselves, thereby increasing the number of people you
know, helping you get to know new people (as opposed to merely
pre-existing friendships you brought to the game).

No longer are groups consolidated late into the evening in large
dungeons as people from each group in that dungeon have to log off
for various reasons.  No, instead of group consolidation by those
who want to keep playing (again, possibly forming new friendships
and relationships, and thus very pro-community), you instead
basically have to quit yourself, assuming there is no mechanism to
bring in other previously known people into your 'instance'.

Groups often also form sporadically.  Person A wants an item in
Instanced Dungeon B, but needs 3 other people -- he finds them, but
to each other they are merely tools in order to achieve what that
Instance might offer them, assuming they triumph for it.  Long term
social bonding is weakened because when groups in an Instance DO
occur not based on pre-existing relationships, those relationships
are just as often as transient as the Instance itself.

And then lastly we come to Raph's excellent point.  We, MMOG players
and developers, constantly clamor for more interactive worlds,
worlds where players can leave a mark, worlds where players have a
chance to affect the world state at least to some degree, even if
temporarily.  This is especially important as we try to reach out to
single player gamers who are used to being the center of the
universe, the protagonist, the savior of the universe.  How do we
make them feel important in a world filled with 2000+ people?

Well, you don't do it by creating duplicate pocket universes for
players.  As Raph said, Instancing works fine for static content not
meant to impact the world state, but for those of us who believe the
future of MMOGs are world states that are indeed impacted by
players, it runs quite contrary to our goals.

In summary, here's what I set out to the Vanguard Designers:

Giving players more and more of a discernable or even perceived
impact on the virtual world they play in is where we want to take
MMOGs, and it's certainly a tenet behind Vanguard -- many of our
planned features are ways players can leave some sort of mark on the
world and, even though it still is ultimately ground hog day, it's
no where as bad as in previous generations of MMOGs.  Instancing is
anti-community building, anti-social, contrary to what MMOGs are all
about (although I've no problem with naming online Instanced games
something else, although I wait to see if they are truly profitable
in a subscription based way), and Raph brings up yet another
argument (one I'd not thought about as much, and so one that caught
my eye and hence my email): Instancing is contrary to our goal of
making player's actions affect, to varying degrees, the greater
world state because it by definition attacks the very concept of a
unified world state.

-------------------------------------------------------
Brad McQuaid
President & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Co-Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh.com
--------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev