Dungeons/Instances

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Open World Bosses

      It's hard to say how difficult they are. In my opinion they're nothing challenging at the moment: they hit hard, require a party (basically), and have long ranges with their attacks. They're lacking teamwork/mechanics to defeat them currently. Since BDO gives you essentially full-control of your character it is hard to gauge how troublesome they are, because in one sense you should never get hit due to the freedom you have in your style/movement. But I don't believe that means you can justify them as the easy content since in theory a low level could solo a boss. My conclusion, in a large party, easy-peasy. A small party, moderate difficulty (greatly depending on levels). Solo, good luck.

      Instanced Dungeons


      Currently, there is no instanced dungeons as of CBT2. There were a couple open world dungeons, but there was nothing riveting about them. As for whether there will be instanced dungeons, I feel like I've heard PA state they won't make any instanced dungeons, but also that they've said the opposite. I'll probably do some research tonight to see what the reality is.

      Relevant YouTube Videos




      Theories

      • Group wipe mechanics if you can't stun the boss in X amount of time using the linking system.
      • Having to use the linking system to burst out X amount of damage before X amount of time is over.
      • Linking objects to activate them. Long shot, but who knows!
      Those are complete guesses/hypothesis.

      Skype: SlashBDO
    • Slash wrote:

      Open World Bosses

      It's hard to say how difficult they are. In my opinion they're nothing challenging at the moment: they hit hard, require a party (basically), and have long ranges with their attacks. They're lacking teamwork/mechanics to defeat them currently. Since BDO gives you essentially full-control of your character it is hard to gauge how troublesome they are, because in one sense you should never get hit due to the freedom you have in your style/movement. But I don't believe that means you can justify them as the easy content since in theory a low level could solo a boss. My conclusion, in a large party, easy-peasy. A small party, moderate difficulty (greatly depending on levels). Solo, good luck.

      Instanced Dungeons


      Currently, there is no instanced dungeons as of CBT2. There were a couple open world dungeons, but there was nothing riveting about them. As for whether there will be instanced dungeons, I feel like I've heard PA state they won't make any instanced dungeons, but also that they've said the opposite. I'll probably do some research tonight to see what the reality is.

      Relevant YouTube Videos




      Theories

      • Group wipe mechanics if you can't stun the boss in X amount of time using the linking system.
      • Having to use the linking system to burst out X amount of damage before X amount of time is over.
      • Linking objects to activate them. Long shot, but who knows!
      Those are complete guesses/hypothesis.


      Soloable? I'd like to try that XD
    • Instances can be used in certain areas.
      Things like portals and such in-game can be used for instancing to kind ease the load.

      Would like to see as little instances as possible though. Open world ftw!
      Hmmm...
      Thought it would be easier thinking up a squid related quote...
      Seems not the case.
    • I'd like to revive this thread, just because I finally was able to play in CBT1 and was quite disappointed at the lack of "instances/dungeons".

      My first impressions of this game are that it is very 'hack and slash' and 'job' oriented. While I get that a new generation of gamers are really into the Minecraft building and collecting materials, there are still many gamers who like the old cRPG and dungeon crawl aspects that laid the paths for games like Black Desert.

      It sounds, from what I read of these posts here, that many believe that you can only have 'open world' or 'instances/dungeons' but that you can't have a happy medium of both. Why?

      First let's discuss the concept of 'open'. If you are limiting a way a person can choose to play a game is it truly open? Saying that dungeons ruin the 'open world' aspect of a game is really 'open world advocates' saying you need to play the game my way. Vice versa if I were to say that they only need 'instance/dungeons' is my way of telling 'open world' proponents that they must play my way.

      I feel that too many games that are put out today do not strike the correct balance between both types of environments, yet I believe that the balance can be met.

      I really want to like Black Desert but it seemed too much like mindless button smashing, following pre-defined routes, low risk/reward missions, no need for partying (in an MMO this seems like an oxymoron) and the storyline progression was very lacking and difficulty.

      I like the difficulties that a well developed dungeon can provide and I believe they suit 'PvE' story-line progression well, while the rest very much suits open world.

      Now - I do realize that much of this is out of our control as the end-users because this may not be the design of the game. I'm just trying to address some of the comments that I felt were one-sided towards 'open world' vs 'instances/dungeons' as if you can only have one or the other. I just respectfully disagree.

      I, for one, hope that Black Desert will add more instances/dungeons to the game with well developed dungeon maps and puzzles. More importantly dungeons designed to specifically take advantage of the skills of a well planned party.
    • Madd Overlord wrote:

      I'd like to revive this thread, just because I finally was able to play in CBT1 and was quite disappointed at the lack of "instances/dungeons".

      My first impressions of this game are that it is very 'hack and slash' and 'job' oriented. While I get that a new generation of gamers are really into the Minecraft building and collecting materials, there are still many gamers who like the old cRPG and dungeon crawl aspects that laid the paths for games like Black Desert.

      It sounds, from what I read of these posts here, that many believe that you can only have 'open world' or 'instances/dungeons' but that you can't have a happy medium of both. Why?

      First let's discuss the concept of 'open'. If you are limiting a way a person can choose to play a game is it truly open? Saying that dungeons ruin the 'open world' aspect of a game is really 'open world advocates' saying you need to play the game my way. Vice versa if I were to say that they only need 'instance/dungeons' is my way of telling 'open world' proponents that they must play my way.

      I feel that too many games that are put out today do not strike the correct balance between both types of environments, yet I believe that the balance can be met.

      I really want to like Black Desert but it seemed too much like mindless button smashing, following pre-defined routes, low risk/reward missions, no need for partying (in an MMO this seems like an oxymoron) and the storyline progression was very lacking and difficulty.

      I like the difficulties that a well developed dungeon can provide and I believe they suit 'PvE' story-line progression well, while the rest very much suits open world.

      Now - I do realize that much of this is out of our control as the end-users because this may not be the design of the game. I'm just trying to address some of the comments that I felt were one-sided towards 'open world' vs 'instances/dungeons' as if you can only have one or the other. I just respectfully disagree.

      I, for one, hope that Black Desert will add more instances/dungeons to the game with well developed dungeon maps and puzzles. More importantly dungeons designed to specifically take advantage of the skills of a well planned party.
      Nobody is saying that dungeons are a bad thing or we don't want them. What we want are open dungeons that people fight to get into. No phasing into a dungeon (like entering another world), but one that keeps to the fact that this is an open world sandbox mmo and not a themepark mmo.

      The game was never meant to have the ai be the challenge but for the players to be the challenge to each other. Fighting over mobs, resources and trade were suppose to make everything exciting and unpredictable (unlike ai mobs). At the end of the day in a game like this the pve story is to get you use to the setting while you go out and make your own story, your own conflicts, your adventure. If you want to be the guild of white knights that like to help new players while taking down evil you are free to do so. If you want to make a guild that is evil and you want to be the conflict for your server, the goal that people want to overcome, and the one who everyones story will revolve around you have that option. You can even just be that guild where people have to pay for your loyalty (if your guild has to skills to back it up). This is what a sandbox offers. The game doesn't hold your hand and point you to the bad guy of the server. It has you create the bad guy and or become the bad guy. Its a Minecraft of mmos where instead of you just building houses and tunnels, you are building a story with thousands of people to join in on.
    • Razzia wrote:

      Madd Overlord wrote:

      I'd like to revive this thread, just because I finally was able to play in CBT1 and was quite disappointed at the lack of "instances/dungeons".

      My first impressions of this game are that it is very 'hack and slash' and 'job' oriented. While I get that a new generation of gamers are really into the Minecraft building and collecting materials, there are still many gamers who like the old cRPG and dungeon crawl aspects that laid the paths for games like Black Desert.

      It sounds, from what I read of these posts here, that many believe that you can only have 'open world' or 'instances/dungeons' but that you can't have a happy medium of both. Why?

      First let's discuss the concept of 'open'. If you are limiting a way a person can choose to play a game is it truly open? Saying that dungeons ruin the 'open world' aspect of a game is really 'open world advocates' saying you need to play the game my way. Vice versa if I were to say that they only need 'instance/dungeons' is my way of telling 'open world' proponents that they must play my way.

      I feel that too many games that are put out today do not strike the correct balance between both types of environments, yet I believe that the balance can be met.

      I really want to like Black Desert but it seemed too much like mindless button smashing, following pre-defined routes, low risk/reward missions, no need for partying (in an MMO this seems like an oxymoron) and the storyline progression was very lacking and difficulty.

      I like the difficulties that a well developed dungeon can provide and I believe they suit 'PvE' story-line progression well, while the rest very much suits open world.

      Now - I do realize that much of this is out of our control as the end-users because this may not be the design of the game. I'm just trying to address some of the comments that I felt were one-sided towards 'open world' vs 'instances/dungeons' as if you can only have one or the other. I just respectfully disagree.

      I, for one, hope that Black Desert will add more instances/dungeons to the game with well developed dungeon maps and puzzles. More importantly dungeons designed to specifically take advantage of the skills of a well planned party.
      Nobody is saying that dungeons are a bad thing or we don't want them. What we want are open dungeons that people fight to get into. No phasing into a dungeon (like entering another world), but one that keeps to the fact that this is an open world sandbox mmo and not a themepark mmo.
      The game was never meant to have the ai be the challenge but for the players to be the challenge to each other. Fighting over mobs, resources and trade were suppose to make everything exciting and unpredictable (unlike ai mobs). At the end of the day in a game like this the pve story is to get you use to the setting while you go out and make your own story, your own conflicts, your adventure. If you want to be the guild of white knights that like to help new players while taking down evil you are free to do so. If you want to make a guild that is evil and you want to be the conflict for your server, the goal that people want to overcome, and the one who everyones story will revolve around you have that option. You can even just be that guild where people have to pay for your loyalty (if your guild has to skills to back it up). This is what a sandbox offers. The game doesn't hold your hand and point you to the bad guy of the server. It has you create the bad guy and or become the bad guy. Its a Minecraft of mmos where instead of you just building houses and tunnels, you are building a story with thousands of people to join in on.
      @Razzia - Thanks fro your thoughtful response.

      I'm not disagreeing with your overall premise. I get what the game is about. It just seems, from all the comments that I've read, that there's this belief that quality PvE and PvP or quality sandbox and theme-park cannot coexist; and PvE seems to be losing out.

      I do not mind your idea that the dungeons are not 'instanced' but rather incorporated as part of the overall open world feel. I do have an issue with the idea that the story-line is nothing more than a tutorial to get you used to the interface and settings. I believe that you certainly can still have a good balance of both a story-line environment and a secondary story that is generated by the community with the conflicts between guilds, control over territories, etc.

      BTW - I'd like to clarify that I was not trying to imply that the instances/dungeons should be PvP-free zones. I do not believe you should be able to circumvent the PvP aspect of the game by hopping into a dungeon/instance. The potential for PvP should follow you regardless of whether you are openly looking for it or trying to progress the story-line of the game.

      My point is that I think there's room for both and for both to be done well.
    • Madd Overlord wrote:

      Razzia wrote:

      Madd Overlord wrote:

      I'd like to revive this thread, just because I finally was able to play in CBT1 and was quite disappointed at the lack of "instances/dungeons".

      My first impressions of this game are that it is very 'hack and slash' and 'job' oriented. While I get that a new generation of gamers are really into the Minecraft building and collecting materials, there are still many gamers who like the old cRPG and dungeon crawl aspects that laid the paths for games like Black Desert.

      It sounds, from what I read of these posts here, that many believe that you can only have 'open world' or 'instances/dungeons' but that you can't have a happy medium of both. Why?

      First let's discuss the concept of 'open'. If you are limiting a way a person can choose to play a game is it truly open? Saying that dungeons ruin the 'open world' aspect of a game is really 'open world advocates' saying you need to play the game my way. Vice versa if I were to say that they only need 'instance/dungeons' is my way of telling 'open world' proponents that they must play my way.

      I feel that too many games that are put out today do not strike the correct balance between both types of environments, yet I believe that the balance can be met.

      I really want to like Black Desert but it seemed too much like mindless button smashing, following pre-defined routes, low risk/reward missions, no need for partying (in an MMO this seems like an oxymoron) and the storyline progression was very lacking and difficulty.

      I like the difficulties that a well developed dungeon can provide and I believe they suit 'PvE' story-line progression well, while the rest very much suits open world.

      Now - I do realize that much of this is out of our control as the end-users because this may not be the design of the game. I'm just trying to address some of the comments that I felt were one-sided towards 'open world' vs 'instances/dungeons' as if you can only have one or the other. I just respectfully disagree.

      I, for one, hope that Black Desert will add more instances/dungeons to the game with well developed dungeon maps and puzzles. More importantly dungeons designed to specifically take advantage of the skills of a well planned party.
      Nobody is saying that dungeons are a bad thing or we don't want them. What we want are open dungeons that people fight to get into. No phasing into a dungeon (like entering another world), but one that keeps to the fact that this is an open world sandbox mmo and not a themepark mmo.The game was never meant to have the ai be the challenge but for the players to be the challenge to each other. Fighting over mobs, resources and trade were suppose to make everything exciting and unpredictable (unlike ai mobs). At the end of the day in a game like this the pve story is to get you use to the setting while you go out and make your own story, your own conflicts, your adventure. If you want to be the guild of white knights that like to help new players while taking down evil you are free to do so. If you want to make a guild that is evil and you want to be the conflict for your server, the goal that people want to overcome, and the one who everyones story will revolve around you have that option. You can even just be that guild where people have to pay for your loyalty (if your guild has to skills to back it up). This is what a sandbox offers. The game doesn't hold your hand and point you to the bad guy of the server. It has you create the bad guy and or become the bad guy. Its a Minecraft of mmos where instead of you just building houses and tunnels, you are building a story with thousands of people to join in on.
      @Razzia - Thanks fro your thoughtful response.
      I'm not disagreeing with your overall premise. I get what the game is about. It just seems, from all the comments that I've read, that there's this belief that quality PvE and PvP or quality sandbox and theme-park cannot coexist; and PvE seems to be losing out.

      I do not mind your idea that the dungeons are not 'instanced' but rather incorporated as part of the overall open world feel. I do have an issue with the idea that the story-line is nothing more than a tutorial to get you used to the interface and settings. I believe that you certainly can still have a good balance of both a story-line environment and a secondary story that is generated by the community with the conflicts between guilds, control over territories, etc.

      BTW - I'd like to clarify that I was not trying to imply that the instances/dungeons should be PvP-free zones. I do not believe you should be able to circumvent the PvP aspect of the game by hopping into a dungeon/instance. The potential for PvP should follow you regardless of whether you are openly looking for it or trying to progress the story-line of the game.

      My point is that I think there's room for both and for both to be done well.
      Lol I believe the both of us are pretty much in agreement. I do agree though that the game could use a couple noninstanced dungeons which should have something to do with the world and actually give us a reason to use them. A good one could be once it's done the mobs don't respond for about half an hour or so and from there it can be a shortcut/secret trade route to another city or something. All in all I feel that if they add more dungeons it needs to not interfere with the overall feel of the game and instead add something more to it.

      The story thing is kinda tricky though. Put to much story in for people to follow and people won't try to make their own adventure or story. They'd be too busy trying to beat the story that the devs have made and it'd no longer be a sandbox game. But at the same time if they don't have any story at all, then people would have no clue where to go, what to do, and just have no bearing in the world itself. All the ideas I can think of end up becoming faction based and we def don't need that. It'd affect the game and the story itself, but the game becomes faction based and we do not need anymore of those in games.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Razzia ().