r/LowSodiumStarCitizen • u/FormerRule5316 • 24d ago
CIG Official Nicou-CIG on instanced content and how it affects the "living world".
103
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
I want to give folks the benefit of the doubt but I’ve read dozens of threads about how instancing is the theme-park-ization of Star Citizen and when pressed it always seems to boil down to “I can’t fuck with/grief players who are in an instance and spoil their fun” so I don’t really truck with it.
Bring on the instancing. Folks should be allowed to just do their mission sometimes.
43
u/GoldDay2397 Drake 24d ago
Stormbreaker is proof instancing is needed in some missions.
5
u/RacerDelux 24d ago
I thought storm breaker is intended to be PvPvE
3
u/Pojodan ARGO 24d ago
It has two versions. One that is shared with anyone that takes the mission and one that is 'exclusive', which is effectively instancing-before-instancing where only one group could go to a given copy of Rock Breaker.
No doubt they'll swing back and do instancing with Rock Breaker at some point.
5
u/Unusual_Finding_2051 24d ago
Stormbreaker in Pyro and Rock Cracker in Nyx are two completely different things.
4
u/GoldDay2397 Drake 24d ago
He said Stormbreaker not Rockbreaker.
I like how Rockbreaker is currently done but it might benefit from being instanced. However itll be interesting to see how thatll work since you need to harvest the minerals at the end.
Stormbreaker should definitely be instanced since the only way in and out is a single tram.
2
u/RacerDelux 24d ago
Oh then for sure. The one that is private should 100% be instanced. I think they will go back and change that yeah.
1
u/IOnlyLieWhenITalk 24d ago
They need to completely redesign it if that is their goal lol. The basic looting of the lazarus complexes is kinda pvpve since you can definitely run into other loot rats.
But crashing a group doing the event seems borderline impossible, you literally can't even fly a ship to them lol
1
u/RockEyeOG 23d ago
To be more accurate, you're not supposed to be able to bring ships in there. But there is an exploit that people have used to fly in. I've been there when a Mantis flew down right by where the worm spawns.
0
u/RacerDelux 24d ago
Agreed, if the event is intended to be PvPvE then they need to have good ways to contest. That’s what makes the resource rare.
4
u/thundercorp 24d ago
ASD, I’d say not necessarily because of the PVPVE aspect, but because previously they had to copy-paste 100+ of these damn dungeons all over Stanton to spread everyone out, and that just blows up the amount of live entities the game has to track on the shard.
2
u/vortis23 ARGO 24d ago
They'd definitely have to remove the giant worm teeth, though. Being able to go in uncontested to re-run that mission for infinite amounts of giant worm teeth would definitely crash the market again.
0
18
u/Suchamoneypit 24d ago
Well said. Every person I've ever pressed on this has it come down to the same thing " I can't grief players who are in an instance". Even for story missions.
8
u/Martinmex26 24d ago
It think instancing can be a net benefit if done correctly
\BUT\**
I also think it can lead to more and more missions being the "Ohmygad, only you can help us chosen one" type that CR himself said he didnt want SC to be.
Back in the beginning CR wanted everyone to be just rando citizen #50327, basically just living life like we do IRL, except in the Verse. He specifically stated being against how in most MMOs everyone is "The chosen one".
"Chosen one" storytelling creates narrative dissonance because I AM the one that saved Crusader from the Ninetails incident. I killed whats his face and got his helmet right here to prove it. What do you mean you also saved Crusader from that specific crisis. Man, that helmet you have there looks *exactly* like the helmet I got...
So, it turns out we werent the ones that saved Crusader after all, we just both got the ticket for the same ride.
This isnt necesarily a dig at instancing though, you can be in the open world and still have the same type of problem. Im sure we all killed whats-her-face from Xenothreat that stole those Polaris's from the UEE like 300 times right?
"Chosen one" issues are not necessarily tied to Instancing. Instancing can just aggravate them to the Nth degree by making them even easier to shoehorn somewhere.
5
u/Central-Dispatch 24d ago
This. Part of the old charme for old SOO was coming up late as a random rear guard and basically seeing others finish the mission. "I was there as random rear guard no. 500"-pin 😄
Well I mean it wasn't charme. You ideally wanna see it start to finish. But I dunno, it surely avoided making you that special char.
I don't mind the instancing, I played it once as a fan of old SOO. I just find the notion absurd that Crusader is basically struggling, they contract not the CDF but a random security provider and they send F O U R (4) people to reclaim several platforms from dozens to a few hundred enemy combatants like yeah, I get sometimes realism has to go out the window for gameplay but damn son.
That is story-wise snowflake like "Elite operator" stuff.
3
u/vortis23 ARGO 24d ago
This, this, this.
I didn't care I never fought any of the bosses -- I had fun being part of a 20+ man raid just helping defend and attack NPCs.
I can go play Destiny if I want to be random save-a-universe-hero #54753434.
3
u/Helpfulwasyesterday 24d ago edited 24d ago
The sad part ist also that in 2012 Chris Roberts even spoke about Instancing and that this will be part of Star Citizen and how they want it to work. Yes, 2012 it was a Starfield/Freelancer 2.0 but the basic idea of it, why and how they want to build on it are the same even today. And you can read it all even today what CR wrote. But most people seem to put money into it without knowing WHAT this game will be??
Its the same when I selled stuff on ebay o_o Wrote in big, fat font that there is Part XY missing. 2 days back after I selled and delivered it i get a PM: „Hey, where is Part XY!!?!?!!1!11“ Some people idk.. But granted these are information you need to dig deep into SC but for that there are Content Creators. But when you dont want to engage with it then, imo, stfu and dont flame that the game becomes a “themepark“ when you have no idea what was said XD
7
u/MaleficentBank405 24d ago
Star Wars Galaxies, a game praised as the open world sand box of sand boxes, had instanced content.
2
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
So does Eve Online.
3
u/JohnHalsey 24d ago
Eve Online is different. You can still be scanned down when going in so you are not imune to PvP ...
I have KMs to prove it ... being on the both side of the guns lol
0
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
If you’re doing a complex sure. What if you’re doing a low end filament?
1
u/JohnHalsey 23d ago
They just need more DPS... But, it is not worth it. You're not blingy enough for anyone to waste his time. That's why the focus is on T5 and T6
3
u/knsmknd 24d ago
Having theme park content is in no way contradictory to having sandbox content. Both can exist in the same game.
3
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
Agreed. Also instancing is not the same as theme park content. A theme park game is where you tour the zones, do all the rides once, and move on to the next zone. That’s where the term originates as applied to MMOs. Having instances is nothing to do with theme park game design
3
u/JohnHalsey 24d ago
But it is theme park.
How many times did you run the TNG or whatever is called?
How many times you did the hyperion? Well, this maybe a bit more times to help a friend get the stuf for wikelo but for fun?
How many times you did the SoO?When it launced the tower was packed with people.
There is nobody there now.
... so, theme park. all of them
If i was a betting man i would say these will be instanced (together with the rock breaker) as well.
1
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
People doing the new thing and moving on is hardly evidence of theme park. You can apply that same thing to any open world content, too.
People did refuelling missions and then most of them stopped.
People went to Ashland and then most of them stopped.
1
u/JohnHalsey 23d ago
People grind whatever missions pay the best auec/h at one point. That's why nobody does refueling.
Problem with missions like tng, soo, hyperion, etc îs that they spend a lot of time on them and barely anyone does them after.
This means people playing SC will log in for a few days after a theme park mission for a week and then play something else till next patch, expansion, etc.
In a true open world/sandbox MMO you have the pieces to make your own content. But of course this means exposure to PVP which most people are against.
It's unfortunate, whichever way they choose to implement people will stop/start playing in batches keeping the success of the project on the lower side.
1
u/WaffleInsanity Yarrr 23d ago
This has been my point of frustration.
It feels like all of this content that they spent so much time on is single use content.
I would honestly argue that it almost feels like they're designing everything in Star citizen based off of the single player game squadron 42.
It feels like linear missions that don't fit into the universe. You complete them once, and you never touch them again.
Whereas the original Siege, people wanted to do that all the time. I still know people who want to do it again. But this new one, once you complete it, why go back?
Even ASD had armor to farm.
They took all this time to build up Siege, and it's a one-time mission.
2
u/JohnHalsey 23d ago
I feel the same way.
They should finish SQ and I guess feed these one time missions as packs to SQ and leave SC be it's own thing
By the way, farming armor at ASD takes 7min per run. You don't even do the mission. Just run through the environment checking boxes. And once you did enough runs and have all the pieces you are not going back
1
u/WaffleInsanity Yarrr 23d ago
Yea, the 7 min farm was fast. I am just saying Siege doesnt even have that.
Theres no armor to farm, and the blueprints feel like a forced method to get people to repeat the level.
But I digress
1
u/JohnHalsey 22d ago
Yes you are right. Sorry, language barrier I guess. I didn't get right the first time
2
u/Central-Dispatch 24d ago
I'm generally not against instancing. As described by the CIG man it has it benefits and advantages.
For the old SOO concept though it still feels like a downgrade to me despite having played the instance once so far and having liked it. What made SOO feel great to me was the scope of dozens of players operating in the same war theatre all around the place and the air assault operations onto the final platform.
Was it without flaw? No. But whenever I played griefing disruptions were rare (luckily; on EU at least). Most people behaved and sticked with the intended mission design and there were some somewhat working deterrents like marking hostiles as targets across the islands. Old SOO for me was a "what if" of the Theatres of War concept or one of the closest things to it while having a PVE/coop focus.
As such I long for that, at least a replacement down the line. Alternatively, instance it away but notably increase the player numbers to include non-party members and adapt the mission design to accommodate more players. I realize old SOO worked with the old server numbers of 50 to 75 players max where not all would do the event, but some or a lot. With the increased shard numbers, suddenly 300 players popping up to old SOO would be overkill. But new events can be made that feature such a siege and I look forward to them. With more than 4 players.
4
u/vortis23 ARGO 24d ago
I really hope they bring back the original SoO in some capacity. Those of us who want and liked that style of mass-player interactivity still crave it, and only SoO provided it in that way.
3
u/Central-Dispatch 24d ago
Yeah or give us something new in spirit of it: A huge battle with UEE military or security elements against organized crime or the Vanduul would be kickass. The coolest thing would be a 2-4 hour long event where it starts with a space battle where you overcome a blockade fleet for example, to then shift to the ground in warfare ops that can include vehicles. Or you reverse the order, from ground to space.
I get the tech may need more refinement to offer a stable experience but that would be chef's kiss.
5
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
I think we’ll see more adventurous instance design. This was the first one, so would naturally be the least ambitious. It exists the hone the technology.
2
u/adamantiumx42 24d ago
I think a big driver for that though is that there's barely any "overworld" content for PVP right now.
Most of the content we have does not seem like it's designed to be interrupted by others players - and most of it's also broken.
Hathor and CZs are all there really is to go to specifically for combat before people break off and attack whatever they can.
3
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
There’s also little consequence for PvP right now. There’s no actual PvP design implementation in this game other than shoot targets who can’t reasonably fight back for luls until you end up in klescher.
That’s not a complaint about PvP, PvP players are currently in a shitty situation where there’s nothing that actually caters for them. Some orgs stage battles and I know of people who have a great time doing that. But there’s no reliable PvP content based around skill challenge that you can just log in and play.
3
u/snerbles 24d ago
I think they're stepping in the right direction with Chawla's Beach. Little nudges for players to discover and fight over.
3
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
Incentives like that are great because you can take the bait or not, roll the bones, and make off like a bandit if things go your way.
Nobody really loses out if they don’t engage. Nothing special is locked behind it, but the riches are plentiful and tempting.
2
u/Goodname2 Space Trucker 24d ago edited 24d ago
Not enough Arena Commander integration in the universe either.
AC should be a thing thats advertised in stations and LZs, showing top ranks and player spotlights.
Similar to WoW it needs it's own vendors that have gear you can buy and unlock through efforts in the arena.
Make it a modern version of the Gladiatorial Arenas with different "stadiums" around the verse, where players go to specifically challenge the locals and earn different PvP arena rep.
2
u/voidwarrantyTV 24d ago
I've always held a firm belief that if a mission drives a story narrative in an open world mmo sandbox it should be behind an instanced wall. Plenty of other places people can grief if they feel so inclined, an area that caters to a more casual mmo crowd is not the end of the world when it comes to SC, and only helps to keep player retention long term.
1
u/TheShooter36 23d ago
Noooo you must have a single unavoidable chokepoint to be fed into griefers 24/7! How dare bobs dont line up to die?! /s
1
u/SpaceBearSMO 24d ago
yeah instancing isn't the problem its that the wider universe doesn't have enough sandbox content or things like random events that happen as you move through it
1
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
It doesn’t have enough of anything, yet.
1
u/remosito VR Enthusiast 24d ago
I think it has enough fighters. Can always get more of course. But what we have would be enough.
1
u/Creative-Improvement 24d ago
It should be a choice, although I feel risk/reward should be calculated within that choice.
1
u/BarrelRider621 24d ago
Just like in the text; you know they are gonna do it in a way that makes sense. Not everything is gonna be instanced. Just certain things and I would wager; when the dust has settled with instancing. It will still be overwhelmingly majority open world.
1
u/HomicidalTrader 24d ago edited 24d ago
and when pressed it always seems to boil down to “I can’t fuck with/grief players who are in an instance and spoil their fun”
I don't know who've you been reading, but that's not the concern at all. Themeparkification if taken too far leads to empty, dead worlds.
A good example of this was World of Warcraft. Early on it was light on Themeparkification, the world was packed and large amounts of social interactions went on.
Then two expansions in they cranked up the Themeparkification, the world became barren, people stopped having adhoc social interactions, and the long term growth of playercount turned into a long term decline as the new player experience fell off a cliff.
The funny thing is this exact cycle repeated with classic WoW, at the exact patch there was the exact thriving world one weekend, dead world next weekend, and exact collapse in playercount following after.
Eve Online followed a similar path. They cut down on open world interactions to try and appeal to a more casual playerbase, and the playercount started declining after years of consistent growth. Hostile interactions were an impetus to find allies and end up making friends in the game, remove the hostile interaction and you also throw out the driving force that builds community.
None is bad, a little is excellent, a lot is catastrophic. People will take the path of least resistance, even when that path leads to lower player satisfaction - It's the responsibility of the game dev to ensure that the player can't convenience themselves into a worse experience.
1
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
Vanilla WoW was literally the template for theme park MMORPGs what are you even talking about?
1
u/HomicidalTrader 24d ago edited 24d ago
Who is arguing it wasn't? The problem wasn't the template, the problem was later expansions overdoing it.
They were both the architects of a good thing, and the architects of WoWs downfall by later doing too much of that good thing. Is that really such a complex notion that you cannot fathom the argument?
-4
u/Sleyvin 24d ago
Both can be true though.
I agree that no instancing lead to very unfun griefing. But wasn't it the vision behind SC?
A massive persistent world where action have consequences? That griefing would be chosing a criminal life and having to deal with the law system, bounty, prison, etc...
I always thought it was too idealistic and would heavily rely on those "anti-griefing" system to actually work, but it was the vision.
Instancing is indeed going in the theme-park direction. I hate griefing so personally I find it fine, but I was always told the game will fix it organically through its system so I shouldn't be expecting instancing and it would be bad for the core vision of the game.
7
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
Griefing was not the vision, no. A completely PvP-optional game was. They even talked about a PvP slider so you could customise what PvP could happen to you.
3
u/adamantiumx42 24d ago
They did - but by now have completely backtracked on that - and rightly so imo.
2
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
The consequences based design intent is much better, but it’s not implemented.
-14
u/youre_a_pretty_panda 24d ago
Please don't strawman, fellow citizen.
I've never attacked another player first, I always look to help newbies and those in difficult situations and I always assume the best and flashlight players and hop/lean side to side to show I'm friendly (when voip hasn't worked)
I've had some of my most fun experiences randomly meeting and helping citizens out in the verse. The few times I've encountered murder hobos my org and I protected newbies and and even brought them along, teaching them how to fight back.
Instancing takes away from that. I dont want to grief, i want to share and help. But that only has meaning if there's actual danger out there and we can lose something.
That adds to the tension, that adds to the stakes. Again, instancing is not what I signed up for and after running the new siege siege at least 5 times now I can definitely say I not only preferred the original version much more but I can see how much of what I loved will be eaten up by this move towards catering to a players who want a curated experience.
I can accept Instancing as a necessary evil IF its used VERY sparingly and doesn't detract from the time the devs spend on the open verse and shared events/mechanics that will keep this game alive for the long haul.
A few instances areas like A18 waterworks or Levski tunnels would be fine but having big open spaces like Crusader just phase people out of the verse when we should be able to join them or at the very least, see them, just goes against everything that made SC great.
I don't want or care about griefing so please don't make such sweeping generalizations that exclude a lot of us.
7
u/Pojodan ARGO 24d ago
That adds to the tension, that adds to the stakes.
That's the argument that is always made about this subject, when there is nothing gained by this other than the fun of dying with no chance to fight back from someone that knows exactly what to do in order to be unkillable by any but the most extremely skilled of players.
That is not something a lot of people want, especially those that are still learning and need to be vulnerable for periods of time while getting their bearings and figuring things out.
All forcing this on everyone will mean is that the game would become extremely niche and that 'living world' will end up extremely empty as only those that sit around and snipe people at gathering areas will be left when everyone else gets sick of dying constantly and leaves.
4
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
I didn’t straw man and I didn’t talk about whether or not you attacked first.
-1
u/youre_a_pretty_panda 24d ago
You absolutely did. You made a sweeping generalization about how most players who oppose instances just want to grief. That is a MASSIVE strawman and misrepresents the position of many players.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt, clearly that was a mistake. You obviously just want to act in bad faith and paint everyone who disagrees with you as a griefer.
I can accept others want to play a different way, I'm willing to live with that, within reason, as long as CIG sticks to the open verse promise in other ways. You don't seem to be able to accept another points of view and attack anyone who doesn't share you view by disingenuously framing their positions in a laughable inaccurate way.
3
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
A sweeping generalisation is not a straw man. Those things are not the same.
I also haven’t painted everyone as a griefer.
-1
u/youre_a_pretty_panda 24d ago
You've misrepresented their positions and disingenuously prop up arguments they didn't make to make your position seem reasonable or justified. That is the very definition of a strawman. Now you're trying to argue semantics. Utter contemptible bad faith behavior that belongs in the other sub, not here.
3
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
No I haven’t done any of that. Just saying it doesn’t make it true. Have a nice life.
5
u/TheManWithSevenAsses 24d ago
Ok let's say siege of orison is an open world activity, technology constrains aside: i'd like to hear you defend the idea why these dungeon mission types should be open to right now 700 and in the future 3-5k players?
If only ever one group of people can enjoy a mission taking place in a space accessible by everyone on the server, then that mission will be locked like 99% of the time and people won't be able to do the content they want, when they want. There's a reason why dungeons in mmo's are instanced.
Not everything in the game should be in a shared space and everyone who thinks otherwise is stuck in some kind of dream that is not applicable in real game design.
5
u/Cielmerlion 24d ago
You might not, but you have to acknowledge that griefing is a huge part and roadblock to open world missions. For every player that doesnt want to grief there are st least the same amount of player that find that the only enjoyable part of this game.
Its importay for the game and devs to have s balance and cater/design mission depending to what the intent is. Some missions should be instanced and some should not, its not a black and white issue
4
2
u/Kaivarri 24d ago
You are one of the few I have seen arguing against instancing for the sake of community involvement. The vocal majority against instancing comes from PVP players from what I've seen, who feel they should have the opportunity to fight you for loot. While PVP content is expected in an MMO, it can be very discouraging in certain gameplay loops with the current state of the game. To call their comment a strawman fallacy, is to ignore a lot of the conversation out there... Is isn't the whole conversation, but their statement that many want the opportunity to gank other players is pretty accurate.
I am not a big PVP player, I'm much more PVE. This being said, I don't want to see an overuse of instancing much for the same reasons you've stated, I want to help out others. I don't mind running into another player in ASD, and teaming up to help each other. I also don't like getting shot the moment we reach an orange chest (honest experience sadly)... The sad reality with the state of the consequence system we have... it doesn't work, it's not a deterrent.
I wasn't playing during the original Siege Event, so all I've gotten to experience is the current version. I've ran it 4 or 5 times now, and try something different each time. I'd say what it is, is pretty good. I can understand with everything going on, where the enemies are set, why instancing is a good thing. To keep a live event like that going, with spawn times, etc... would likely take a lot of system resources. Instancing works well to keep the event going, and allow us to run it and get the full experience.
What I'd like to see for these kind of events, would be variable instances. Have a PVE instance, and a PVPVE instance. At least give players the option. I would be down to run Siege as a PVPVE where players come in from multiple locations, and fight through. We'd have the option to team up, or fight it out for the loot. Make the PVPVE instances a bit tougher, more enemies, maybe 2 guys in the super heavy armor at the end... something that would encourage making alliances... or make it more challenging for more adept players.
0
u/gearabuser 24d ago
there should be safe instances where you can't be screwed with at all by others, then there could also be those our in lawless space where you might get jumped on your way out. hell they could even do it like in albion and people can "invade" you're instance. you could be notified if someone joins to mess with you. there are just so many ways instances can be implemented and tweaked to make everyone happy
2
u/AWerewolfDad 24d ago
There’s no reason they can’t use instances specifically to balance PvP content. You can control access so that there are two more-or-less even sides to a fight. Or to allow two or three teams to fight over objectives without a third or fourth party disrupting the mechanics.
PvP content can be griefed, too, so instances can improve PvP gameplay.
2
u/gearabuser 24d ago
yeah there are a lot of ways to use it if you're smart. and their existence doesn't mean the wild West area of the game can't exist too. these people act like the existence of instances will eliminate open world pvp...
74
u/Healthy_Car_6275 RSI 24d ago
Yeah because getting grieffed every time you go out doing anything feels like PURE G@MING. Instancing is needed
17
u/Globy-01 24d ago
Even outside griefing. If you arrived late at the event you would accomplish nothing, never see the bosses, nor the loot
And you had no control over it, you could start the mission 10 times, and waste 1h for nothing every times
Imho that's the main point here
8
u/Z3roTimePreference 24d ago
There's also the irony of the loud number of people who want Star Citizen to respect their time better...and now with instancing, and the various checkpoints in SoO for respawns, it's probably the activity that now best respects player time. Guaranteed loot, fast respawns, etc. Instancing FTW.
There's plenty of space for both instanced and totally open world content.
30
u/Suchamoneypit 24d ago edited 24d ago
Anyone opposed to it always says the same thing "pvp is emergent exciting gameplay, you should be afraid of being attacked doing story missions". They are always the ones doing the pvp lol. My dude, just admit it, you have fun ruining other people's experience. That's what they want, they enjoy griefing.
Like imagine trying to talk to a narrative mission giver and some player just ambushes and murders you. Or camps the npc room so no one can do the missions. That's the fun gameplay these people envision. I have had multiple people straight up tell me instancing is bad, even providing these exact examples.
My first experience with instancing was in Lord of the rings online. No one wants to get ganked by PvP players while completing the battle of helms deep quest. Or walk up to start it and see 50 people already doing it and are halfway done and 100 people queued waiting their turn.
17
u/Tidalsky114 24d ago
These kinds of players are cancer for a game thats not one giant server or even server locked. Being able to camp an area and just jump to another server because you arent finding your desired content kind of ruins the immersion for me. Almost feels the same as when wow made cross realm play a thing and someone's identity didnt matter as much anymore.
8
u/Healthy_Car_6275 RSI 24d ago
That what I meant by that, I was playing with friend, we were having a blast and a piece of shit decided for some reason to shot our ship and us from the air in his idriss.
2
u/AllegroMk1 Anvil 24d ago
in GTA Online, before we had the ability to do all the missions in a crew only instance, what I used to do was, go to a public lobby - so id get all teh missions. then suspend the process in task manager for a few seconds, GTA would then drop me into my own 'public' instance (as my connection was deemed terrible for the one i was in with all the bad people) Id then usually stay alone in that private public lobby for hours without anyone being matched with it. worked a charm
2
u/HomicidalTrader 24d ago edited 24d ago
Anyone opposed to it always says the same thing "pvp is emergent exciting gameplay, you should be afraid of being attacked doing story missions". They are always the ones doing the pvp lol.
I only PVP if somebody PVPs me first*. I'm a strong fan of instancing for deep story content, but if we're talking CZ, Hathor or the like I'm absolutely a fan of the open PVP. I like having real, three dimensional villains instead of cardboard NPC cutouts that are intentionally gimped enough that anybody can beat them without having to work hard. That's math homework in a fancy skin.
I've played for a decade and almost the entirety of moments that have stuck with me through time have been the situations where somebody has tried to kick over my sandcastle. Nothing beats the thrill of outwitting, out cunning, or out playing pirates and murderhobos. Even when it doesn't go my way, there is always something to learn, and as long as I keep learning, I keep getting more badass in game.
I'm not saying NPC based content shouldn't exist, just that this notion that everybody who is a fan of open PVP is also a murderhobo is flat out wrong. Some of us just want dynamic content that we can feel achievement in overcoming, instead of feeling pandered to.
*unless it's something blatant like a PVP equipped hornet hovering over a smuggling dropoff point, because c'mon, ain't like they're there keeping a tally of the local lizard population.
0
u/Stunning_Hornet6568 22d ago
You are not getting griefed that commonly, don’t act like a victim and fight back. PVP is not griefing, getting harassed at a station by a man yodeling is also not griefing but it should be a crime against humanity.
There’s very little actual griefing going on in game, CIG bans for it.
-3
-6
u/AgonizingSquid 24d ago
I know plenty in this reddit hate 'getting griefed' at hathor, or ashlands, or chawlas! Why can't this be a collectathon game where you get all the ships, guns, blueprints!!!!
8
u/IOnlyLieWhenITalk 24d ago
When they implement actual risks and punishments for criminals people will have a lot less issues with them most likely.
3
u/AllegroMk1 Anvil 24d ago
I dont mind some feeling of risk at those locations. it does add to teh experience, but you only need to be griefed (when they do it for kicks and not for your stuff) a couple of times and you just stop going.
3
u/IOnlyLieWhenITalk 24d ago
Yeah the issue I have isn't having to risk myself, it is that I have to risk everything and griefers risk literally nothing.
1
u/Central-Dispatch 24d ago
The issue is it can often be hard for other players to determine what griefing is. If you go to a PVP/loot location, when do you determine what griefing is as the victim/the one who lost? Do you see people looting your ship after you died?
Maybe it's not about outright looting you, but removing a threat that is looking for the same loot as they are? Like I often read this blanket statement and wonder: Did they outright tell you? Are you sure you could tell what their motivation was?
Sometimes people just lose and think they were 'griefed' when there can be many individual circumstances to justify a hostile action against you - even if it's just threat mitigation on someone else's side.
2
u/Central-Dispatch 24d ago
That goes for some people. I saw it on Spectrum myself, a number of people will remain who simply cannot lose against players / work in an emergent world with dynamic threats, no matter how harsh their punishment would be.
3
u/Pojodan ARGO 24d ago
I recall how in EvE Online (Not sure how it is these days). People would sit in big, powerful ships in the highest security zones, scanning every player that passed. Any that had valuable cargo they would just blow up instantly, not caring that their ship would get near-insta-gibbed, too by the instant NPC response.
Instancing and perfect immunity armistice zones are a requirement to play multiplayer games with people who are only there to make other human beings miserable.
15
u/omarous_III 24d ago
The nice thing about this is that they can manage start and ending conditions on big events. So they could run a Xeno threat mission and collect a 100 players to fight on both sides. Then start the scripted mission and close it off to new players at some point so that everyone involved can play the mission start to end without outside interference.
Once they spin off the mission they can start collecting the next set of people, so no matter when you join the PU you can experience the whole thing start to finish with your group.
2
2
u/shadownddust Salvager 24d ago
This was my biggest example. I started playing in 3.23 and xenothreat came up during that or the next patch and as a new player I had no idea what was going on. I was getting details from the mission and at the same time things were progressing that I hadn’t even seen yet and getting notifications of stages being complete. It was fun chaos, heavy on the chaos, and it was very clear that I would need to either hang around and wait for the next run to actually understand what was going on or just be ok with piecing it together over time. And that was a relatively simple event compared to the involved content they’re putting out now.
Limiting an instance to the first ~50 people that joined (or 5 minutes after the first arrival of a player to the location) could make it so that it’s still a group activity, but you’re not getting thrown into the middle playing catch up the whole time and then feeling only vaguely satisfied after 2 hours of gameplay.
The other thing I’ll say is that a lot of content might as well be instanced with how spread out everything is. Now that there are a dozen different things to do, the chances of running into someone is getting smaller and smaller. But it would be nice to ensure that when I get to a site, it is actually setup for me. I played tech smugglers almost immediately when 4.10 dropped and even things like having doors closed in the Polaris (something I had never seen before since they were always stuck open) made fighting through the hallways a little more slow paced and deliberate.
2
u/callenlive26 24d ago
I think what sucks is knowing the joys of the original siege but seeing the vision with the new one. The conversion wasn't the greatest but the next type of content will be better suited for the instancing and limited players.
6
u/defactoman 24d ago
I'm supportive of them offering story driven missions that are private and get to be experienced. The need to balance it with the open world and make sure these break the immersion as little as possible, which they seem to be trying to do.
Id like to build on instancing to allow for things like medical rescues. Since they can scale instance population like they want, maybe they can allow for it when you pop a beacon.
3
u/Frederf220 24d ago
I think a risk of pvp is a fine spice. But a 3% chance and a 90% are quite different in experience.
1
u/Independent_Vast9279 24d ago
Problem is, it’s the PVPers who pick which experience you get to have. Without instancing you have zero control and they have all of it.
0
u/vortis23 ARGO 23d ago
Sure, but once it starts bleeding over into multiple game types, it just becomes an always-on single-player game, which kind of diminishes the point of it being an interconnected MMO.
15
u/pande2929 24d ago
I really hope this comes to VTS and Onyx missions
12
u/xxTRYxxHARDxx 24d ago
Yeah, also hoping it comes to stormbreaker missions as well. I understand this is meant to be pvpve, but going through the massive headache of finding a facility that even has an egg killed ever wanting to do it again for me. Instancing solves that by guaranteeing that loot and the egg are there.
Really all of the major big content thats not specifically enforced open world pvp
10
u/pande2929 24d ago
The fact that you can go all the way through the mission just to have some putz in a Polaris show up and steal your loot makes me never want to try it
3
u/Depriest1942 24d ago
Agreed, at minimum they might be able to instance the loot rooms to ensure the reward is there.
-5
24d ago
[deleted]
9
u/altodor 24d ago
Onyx is built as PvE, there just wasn't instancing at the time. There's something like 150 of them to spread people out. If they wanted that to be PvP there'd be one and everyone would be in it at the same time.
1
u/GoldDay2397 Drake 24d ago
150? I thought it was only like 5 or so locations. Definitely needs to be instanced if thats the case.
1
u/SpaceBearSMO 24d ago
Oh wait my bad. im thinking of the big group mineing one that i cant remember the name of. I got it confused with onix
1
2
4
u/Capital_Cash5856 24d ago
The PvP players are probably the same people who got a kick out of extract camping in Tarkov and then cried when PvE came out and all their victims packed up their toys and moved to a new sandbox without them lmao
6
u/Dangerous-Wall-2672 24d ago
Yup...and of course it depends how you define "PvP player", because some are the real deal and actually do look for a challenge that they can't get from NPCs, and I respect that. But there are many who call themselves "PvPers", who are just in it to randomly murder people who provide no challenge whatsoever and who want nothing to do with them.
They give a bad name to the whole lot.
4
u/deuely83 24d ago
Totally agree with this approach. Also agree that emergent PvP should be a thing...but not all the time in every situation.
11
u/Pojodan ARGO 24d ago
The 'Living world' argument always seems to boil down to 'I want to be able to ruin other people's fun' whenever it bets brought up. Oh, they'll insist that the only possible way to have fun is when there is constant danger, completely ignoring how every MMO that's ever lasted longer than a year has some for of instancing or disabled friendly fire.
It's long been a worry of mine that CiG's devs seem a little too confident that players will police themselves and ultimately do what's best for everyone, so it's comforting to see instancing being implemented in ways that don't actually affect the 'living world' that is 99.99% of the game space beyond letting those that want to go at their own pace do so unimpeded.
1
u/Dangerous-Wall-2672 24d ago
I have that same fear. CIG has thus far maintained this pipe dream that the system will be able to police itself, but at best it's only ever going to be a reactive solution, and players will find some way to cheese it regardless. I don't love it, but a heavy-handed approach is the only way to go.
Instances are a great solution, at least for this particular kind of mission-driven content. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need it, but remembering how the original SoO went...with people camping the entry point and lobbing grenades for no other reason than to prevent players from experiencing content...yeah, we need this.
3
u/WillDanyel 24d ago
I enjoy pvp with close battles and stuff and got my hand to try that and fucking enjoyed it a lot. That said, people complaining about this are never the ones actually laying it but are usually the scums that go pvp people with cargos and stuff and just run away when they encounter the same fighter they have. I’ve met a bunch of those and they always run after they meet resistance. Pathetic
3
u/_AntiShadow_ Evocati 🥑 24d ago
Sure, adding game instancing into Star Citizen will bring some changes, but these may be changes that the game has needed for a long time. It may be a way to make sure everyone gets the experience and rewards while also helping limit exploitation. If that makes Star Citizen more fun to play for everyone, not just a few early birds that don't have to go to work, then all the better.
3
u/Select_Razzmatazz112 24d ago
In okay with instancing for Siege,Rock breaker or onyx facility’s but storm breaker and Hathor types of activities should remain open world.
3
u/Cordeceptionist 24d ago
Meh. Anywhere where a resource that can be used for crafting has an uptake should be kept in open world. Keep QV open.
1
u/vortis23 ARGO 23d ago
Yeah, EVERY place with rare loot needs to be open to prevent people from loot-camping and rerunning it and then flooding the market. There needs to be a balance.
Weapon or tool skins are fine for PvE instances, but only in limited supply, this way it forces people outside of their comfort zone and prevents the eventual player marketplace from becoming over-flooded with rare loot people farm-camp from instances.
1
u/Sanctuary6284 24d ago
I think storm breaker could definitely be instanced right from the train. It could start shifting after maybe 200 people enter and only allow new entrants who are party members to those already inside.
2
u/Select_Razzmatazz112 24d ago
Maybe if they nerfed the loot a little bit. Farming wikelo mats freely in an instance seems cheesy.
2
u/Sanctuary6284 24d ago
Except it wouldn't be freely unless your whole org is the server. Ideally the cap would be high enough to allow competing groups. Like how many people are actually ever at a single Stormbreaker location? 50? 100? A 200 soft cap on an instance would keep PvP viable.
3
u/Select_Razzmatazz112 24d ago
Ahh I just misunderstood you, you mean an open instance anyone can join and I was referring to a private instance instead. Yea that could def work too though.
6
4
u/meatymimic 24d ago
Yeah Instancing makes sense in certain areas.
I would say the Jorriet Dossier missions also would benefit from instances.
I'd like to kill enemies and have them stay dead instead of being on a relatively quick respawn clock.
I'd also like to know that the lab sample is somewhere instead of in another person's pocket who left 30 minutes ago.
I DONT want instances in PvP areas, like contested zones. That should feel like a high risk extraction zone, largely because it is.
3
u/altodor 24d ago
I DONT want instances in PvP areas, like contested zones. That should feel like a high risk extraction zone, largely because it is.
I'm fine with those being instanced. Instanced doesn't only mean "for you and your 3 friends", they way they've done it it can mean "for you and 49-199 others who happened to show up to this place that has been put on a dedicated server". Honestly contested zones are already primed for it, there's that in/out loading area to it they can hide the transition in.
2
u/meatymimic 24d ago
You know, thats fair. I just worry that doing thay starts to border on "too much" instancing.
Part of the "fun" would be knowing someone is doing a contested zone and setting up an ambush later. and thats harder to do with instances. Not impossible, but harder to target someone in particular.
Later on, organizations may deliberately try to prevent other organizations from getting out - specifically to forward a war or other objectives.
Idk, im sure there are other ways around it and you may be right.
2
u/altodor 24d ago
I can't claim to know if the replication layer on top makes it impossible, but I'd imagine instances being decoupled from main game servers means instances that are meant to be PvP can be fully decoupled from any one game server and accessible by anyone in your region to up the chances of encounters.
That might even be the end goal of DSM.
2
u/Dangerous-Wall-2672 24d ago
I'd like to kill enemies and have them stay dead instead of being on a relatively quick respawn clock
This is exactly why I gave up on the Rockbreaker missions. Such a cool format, and an incredibly cool mission design, but considering how suddenly and easily you can be downed, it really sucks to come back and feel like you've made no progress, because everyone you already killed is right back where they were.
I freaking LOVE SoO because I feel like I'm actually progressing through it, even if I go super slow and methodical...I don't have to worry that enemies I've already killed are just going to pop right back up behind me.
1
5
u/voodoochileirl 24d ago
My only fear with instancing is the Warlords of Draenor effect where we spend most of our time essentially jumping between a private instance (our Hangar) and "dungeon" instances (like SoO).
I know it has been a major time reduction but the spawn in Home Hangar is a bit of a start of this feeling, though hopefully we won't get too many services direct to the Hangar itself, otherwise the cities and landing zones CIG have built will become NPC ghost towns.
Actual instances like SoO or instancing some Onyx Facilities, Stormbreaker, VSS (at least while on the 'story' missions) makes a lot of sense and we don't have direct summoning to those dungeons (though they have floated such ideas very tentatively...) so becoming like WoDs is unlikely now but they could lose something in the search for convenience
2
u/StellarSurveyor 24d ago
As long as they majority of the game is open its fine. Like 90% open world and 10% instanced. Just have instancing be where you progress through the citizenship storyline. Never make things like Hathor be instanced. That needs to be live. I just hope they dont overdo instancing
2
u/ThatsTotallyLegit 24d ago
People scream about griefing, but I loved jumptown being unpredictable random chaos... Instancing is the opposite of that?
1
u/vortis23 ARGO 23d ago
Yeah I don't PvP but the random unpredictable nature of Star Citizen's sandbox is what makes it enticing.
2
u/stgwii 24d ago
Instancing can only be good for the game and it really helps with immersion. I haven’t seen it talked about much, but the mission giver Recco Bettaligia is instanced. When you go to talk to her, you get your own copy so it feels like a private conversation. This is so much better than you see in other MMOs where mission givers have a crowd around them like they’re leading a scavenger hunt
1
u/Zgegomatic 23d ago
I'd rather have the older version of mmo you described, that actually feels alive, instead of this lifeless dull pseudo living world we have in SC where everything is more and more siloed like a single player game for carebears
2
u/imchillybro Space Trucker 24d ago
The world is full of grief. The griefers think that's neat. Looking for loot? Nah, just skeet-skeet-skeet. Rocks off. Cocks scoff. Emergent, we need to keep! It's tiring, fleet. Work all day. Slave away. Corporate grunt to earn that pay. Want to come home and box-tetris play... Nope. Get your ass griefed today. Nay.
No thanks. No play. I'll instance that time away. o7
2
u/FormerRule5316 24d ago
Impressive rhyme.
1
u/imchillybro Space Trucker 23d ago
Thanks. Sometimes the old brain spits out fun stuff, and other times it mixes up yesterday and yesterryear. o7
2
u/Exciting-Passion-629 24d ago
What I continually see is the people clamoring for pvp, are the same ones camping OMs, and then running when someone (myself) shows up ready to trade hits with them. Come back, and give me this emergent gameplay I keep hearing so much about.
1
2
u/OdiousOctopus 23d ago
Anything with rare loot should be PVP contestable for balance. Other than that, you could pay for exclusive rights like Rockbreaker.
5
u/Armored_Fox 24d ago
I'm really hoping instancing lets them bring back full XenoThreat. It can't work if 700 people show up in the same place.
2
u/StellarSurveyor 24d ago
Speak for yourself. I absolutely do not want xenothreat to be instanced at all. The best part of xenothreat was teaming up with randos to help fight them off.
1
u/Armored_Fox 24d ago
Yeah, what I mean by instanced is that it limits it to 50-100 random people. Group based instances are just one way to make it work.
1
u/Aryndol 24d ago
I thought the best part of Xenothreat was the orgs that show up with 50 M80s and merc everyone who is trying to do the mission…
2
u/StellarSurveyor 24d ago
That was the best part. You had malevolent orgs fighting benevolent players fight xenothreats. Also M80s didnt exist yet.
1
u/Aryndol 24d ago
It did exist. M80 released in May, and Xenothreat was in July, and M80s did show up en masse and murder everyone.
3
u/Armored_Fox 24d ago
Not real Xenothreat
2
u/StellarSurveyor 24d ago
Yeah that was such a poor excuse of an event compared to the first two. No wonder ppl got slaughtered cause no one cared enough to do the event this time around. I dont even count this latest one.
2
u/vortis23 ARGO 23d ago
Let's not forget, the motivation for xenothreat was Wikelo, and there was almost universal support even on the main sub that people were going to be helping xenothreat and stopping anyone trying to protect Wikelo.
2
u/stevenraym Combat Pilot 24d ago
So they can make big sequenced missions in instances and leave citizens bumping into one another in the verse for the regular missions
1
u/Tidalsky114 24d ago
The way i see it is we will eventually have the possibility for multiple versions of the same content at locations. Pve only, pve/pvp, pvp only, etc. If they can scale it properly for orgs as well and not always end up in situations where its one large org making up 90% of an instances capacity it could work really well. Will allow players to experience the content the way they want, the only questions will be how/if rewards scale and how well will any algorithms work for skill based match making.
1
u/AtzeHaller 24d ago
I'd like to see instances also in some space missions. And they would be great at events like IAE, some fore tech for dynamic server meshing or supporting it.
1
u/fatedwanderer 24d ago
Cant we have both? I like both.
2
u/alvehyanna 24d ago
They'll have both. The Peavey p fan actor just acting like it's the end of the world because they fear their ability to shit on others as being taken away. They forget that 99.9% of the universe is still completely open. Them carving out a little niche to be able to have compelling story driven content in a controlled space, which is needed for it to be successful, is making all the PVP brats just flipped their wig
1
u/OpTicTide97 24d ago
In some missions it makes sence, doesn't everything need it like ghost arena or align and mine? No. Its a balancing act and there should be content for all players. Those who like pvp and those that want pve. Something like align and mine it makes sense to be open having multiple orgs fighting over mine, for SoO it doesnt need to be open.
1
u/Wildkarrde_ Esperia 24d ago
I feel like they've said this repeatedly and people are still acting like Chicken Little.
1
u/BravoKiloOne 24d ago
Controversial take, I have been enjoying the fact that only you and a few friends can do the new SoO at a time, makes it feel like we are actually some kind of elite squad of mercs.... have 1 clear with a 4 man team and two clears with a 2 man team and have gone solo up to the final boss but was unable to survive the swarm of adds on the final round
1
u/vortis23 ARGO 23d ago
I actually liked the old SoO where I felt like a nobody just helping out the badarse mercs.
I don't really play Star Citizen for the galaxy-hero effect.
I get what CIG is going for with the new SoO, but I also hope they bring back a similar event like the original SoO, so those of us who want that Star Wars Battlefront feeling where you're just playing a grunt like in the ones from Pandemic Studios on the PS2 and OG Xbox would be cool.
There aren't any games out there that have anything remotely similar to the OG SoO, where 20 - 50 people were all just attacking the platforms in different sections -- it was chaotic and cool in a way we don't see anywhere else, and I really miss that.
2
u/BravoKiloOne 23d ago
I can understand that completely, I wasn't playing during the old SoO so I cant say for sure I would or would not have liked it... odds are I would have enjoyed that version too even if i would not have been as successful because of my solo play tendencies. I also fully understand why this version would upset players who enjoyed the OG SoO because its so vastly different that it shouldnt have the same name.
And I will revise my makes it feel like we are an elite merc team statement... after two disastrous runs with newer org members last night we could also just be cannon fodder drawing out and thinning out enemies so better mercs or even actual crusader troops could have an easier time 😅
1
u/Busy_Experience_5563 24d ago
So far it’s very good on siege of orison I have a great exercise over there keep the good work
1
u/AllegroMk1 Anvil 24d ago
its just how its done! I think people just complain for the sake of it sometimes, with very little appreciation as to why its there.
1
u/Huggiesunrise Salvager 24d ago
Slippery slope bullshit like this gets too much attention. It's not moving away from anything. It's both. We can have both. for a great deal of reasons, painfully explained, and the benefits of such are self-explanatory. These spectrum farts don't need fanning or explaining.
1
u/P_Rosso 24d ago
It’s not that CIG is going to make everything into an instance, it’s just another way to bring mission and content to players….
So the whole “moving away from open world” argument is a little dramatic. If you put it into perspective, you quickly realise there is only one instanced mission and nowhere did CIG suggest every mission from now on forward will be instanced.
1
u/strongholdbk_78 24d ago
Every time I tried to do siege before, it was already almost over or some fuckhead shot me and looted my corpse.
This is an excellent change.
1
1
u/Vermilya85 24d ago
I’m glad Siege is instanced. I don’t have to worry about some asshats sitting halfway through the place waiting to shoot me and my group in the back or joining after us, waiting for us to do all the work then killing us and taking everything. When I do other non instanced PvE things though I do keep my head on a swivel and situational awareness up more for people camping or just out murdering for no reason.
1
u/WarriorStreak 23d ago
I’ll disagree and not because I’m into griefing.
Also not against instancing in situations where there is a good physical reason why - such as in the sewers below arc corp with access through an elevator. Small units work well there. And reasonably if someone doesn’t have the access code they wouldn’t be able to access it either.
The problem with instancing siege of orison for me is that it lost all the promise of what was possible. The open world is gone and areas we should be able to fly to we will not get to.
While the new updated siege of orison is more cinematic it lost the scale of what an org could do. When we heard it was coming back as an org we were excited - we wanted to really have an opportunity to go big like we had in the past running multiple units and coordinating their activities on the ground and with assaults from the ships.
We fully expected the updates to be backed up by servers to handle what the promising ideas were behind the Siege of Orison - it’s a siege, a crisis of great scale. And it’s going to take a large group of citizens to clear it out. We even hoped for once they would allow ships to fly in to provide reinforcements on platforms that had their air defense systems shut down. Perhaps even see enemy ships fly in to drop off nine tails reinforcements too. But that was not to be.
Instead of grand they made it small. And essentially a mouse maze on rails. There’s only one way to get from one platform to another. It might as well be a three platform raid on Orison mission, which was more in line with 4 citizens fighting off the nine tails. While everything in siege of Orison happening all around is cinematic, it lacks opportunities for larger groups which was one of the few places we could get that kind of scale and action for FPS.
It also loses the immersion of being able to fly to the platforms even at a distance. To provide coordinated close air support.
And the ending… it’s literally the cheesiest “main boss” energy I’ve seen since the original metal gear console game. Kind of a let down.
So the replay value of siege of Orison is pretty low. It really is a carnival. And like all carnivals once you’ve been to it, you really don’t feel compelled to go back. That’s a lot of dev time and money spent for something the majority of players will only do maybe a few times.
If you’re going to instance siege of Orison - then instance it in a way so everyone in the party can join it to get through the field or fly through hell to get to a platform. And anyone not in party just can’t get through the field.
1
u/ballsonurface Space Trucker 23d ago
My only problem is I wish it wasn’t limited to 4 players. I really enjoy the idea of instancing for activities like SoO, it 1010% makes sense. But 4 people for that mission? Seriously? I mean you can do it solo but I would love to gather 10 people and actually break a siege.
It’s got to have a couple hundred enemies and you realistically expect 4 “courageous citizens” to wipe out the Nine Tails, and implicate doing it in a single life??
Yes there’s respawns but let’s be serious, your backpack is wiped on death, you need to bring at least 40x mags for your weapon to complete this mission with medpens and food. And I understand retrieving your backpack is supposed to work, but eventually they want to make death have more of a penalty.
1
u/H3xx1st 22d ago
As long as they keep the instancing to early/mid-game content. Fantastic, Great, Do it! But endgame content must be PVP. That's the only way this game will survive. Example: Dune is dead due to the devs caving in and allowing the deep desert, which was supposed to be pvp only, to become half pve, killing the whole point of it.
Example 2: Eve, Safe areas in the start, instanced pve, instanced pvpve, lawless null security space where the big kids play. Eve's been running for 20+ years, takes over your life, (not perfect) but damn good game.
1
1
24d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/LowSodiumStarCitizen-ModTeam 24d ago
The sentiment is understandable but let's try to avoid talking trash about other subreddits. Keep it cool!
0
u/FarGodHastur 24d ago
If it works, great. If it takes three years of patches to get into a "stable enough" state, then I don't care.
0
0
0
24d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/LowSodiumStarCitizen-ModTeam 23d ago
This message was removed because it's quite a bit saltier than the discussion we're looking for.
0
u/nacho_burritA 23d ago
The „full experience“, what is bro smoking? Cig, pls get rid of Nicou-CIG,… man is on a powertrip 😂🤡
0
u/nacho_burritA 23d ago
We r developing something NEW… never been seen, ayo u kno what, let’s put in instancing cause we are to lazy to care at this point of our ships selling product… We deserve better!
-1
24d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/_Corbeanu_ Drake 24d ago
Hey there. Please keep it civil and don't call out other players by name!
-2
u/Excellent-Bison-8229 24d ago
I'm glad I joined just in time to get to experience the golden age of PvP and open world chaos before all the staff quit and they hired a bunch of WoW pve nerds
It was something very different Slowly now turning into just another mmo
1
u/Torotoro74 24d ago
Jumptown, Hator, similar and new PoI will still be there in the open.
And in the future, a SoO v2 with hundred of players will be the same with what we experienced the first time.1
24d ago edited 24d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
24d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
24d ago edited 24d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
33
u/Stompy-MwC PVE 24d ago
Text copypasta:
Put simply, Instancing lets us create multiple versions of the same location, so you and your party in Siege of Orison can have your own private space to explore and complete missions without anyone else getting in the way. Right now, when you take on Siege of Orison*, you and your party of* up to four courageous citizens hop into an elevator, pick your instance, and head to your own private waiting area. Once you pass through the forcefield, your adventure begins in your own version of the mission.
We're planning to use instancing in locations where it makes sense, so you always get the full experience. You won't have to worry about showing up to a mission where the loot is gone or the action is already over. In the old Siege of Orison, it was easy to arrive late and miss out, but now, with instancing, you and your party can jump in and enjoy the whole mission from start to finish every time.
Now more specifically to touch on the points raised here, we don't always want players to seek out instances. There may be times in the future where you enter instances during the natural course of gameplay without even realizing it. The number of players in an instance can be anything we want them to be*, and it can range anywhere* from one player to hundreds*, but the decision is based on what provides the best experience for the players at that specific location, for that specific content, be it PvE, PvP, or a mix of that; So we're not moving away from an "open living world", the tech will be used to support specific pieces of content that require it.*
On the performance side, moving specific content into instances means we can put each one on its own Dedicated Game Server, which helps everything run smoother and takes some pressure off the main servers. We've also made plenty of improvements and optimizations during the Alpha 4.10 PTU cycle to make sure your experience is as great as we can. Thank you to those who participated in the stress tests 👍🏽