I can't stand all these new games that everyone at a certain lvl is no better than the next at that lvl. I feel that skill based systems give much more realism and free mobility in a game if i want to be a healer and then later descide maybe i should have been a fighter i want that option without starting a new avatar.
With level based system it's obvious that the higher level player will most likely win in pvp. In a skill based system it's the person who makes the right choices at the right time that will determines the victor. Class just limits what a person can do. If you're in a rock, paper, scissors type of game you can tell who's what and already know if you can or can't counter it. Play it long enough and you can predict what anyone's going to do. Some may like this kind of system but it gets very dull and boring. In a skill based game you have little or no clue as to what your opponent is going to do. The freedom to choose whatever skills to aid you on your journey to save the world or destroy it makes the game that much more enjoyable to play.
In a level based system your players are made up of newbies, lower levels and the ever so snotty high levels. I hate this kind of community. In all the games I’ve played a lot the higher levels think they're some high class hot shot who wouldn't even talk to you just because your level is lower then theirs. Kids like this kind of system because it makes them feel superior to the next guy with a lower number.
Level and class based systems have been done to death. Remember the good old games before levels started to become a staple in rpg? They're some of the funniest games to play. Obtaining a new skill or power up felt like you actually archived something important. Where your items and skills could be used when you obtained them. Where level only increase stat points and didn't limit your character's choice in their progression throughout the game. I want that kind of feeling again.
I think the original question is wrong. Games should be level AND skill based. I think the idea of 'classes' is an archaic leftover from the pen and paper days; although they do make it easier for new players to get into a game. And the concept of having to use a skill in order for it to keep its effectiveness sounds good on the surface but is annoying and tedious in practice (WoW's weapon skills are a good example).
If you do levels and skills together you get the following benefits:
(I'm assuming that skills are only learned once and are usefull from that point on, never have prerequisites or level restrictions, and don't have to be used to retain usefulness. It is possible to do this btw.)
PvP is a true test of skill because you have no idea what your opponent can do. No more "He's wearing cloth and has a big blue pet so I know he'll do this and then I'll do that and then..." When it is like that the combat is 90% predetermined by class (and plz don't argue that point, I've heard all the arguments before). With a level+skill system the way I'm thinking of it a player wearing cloth might not know any spells at all and will dice you into little scooby-snacks. PvP would require reacting to the combat rather than predicting it.
You can STILL provide players with classes to pick from if they want to simply by defining a preset selection of skills for the player to learn as they level (which is really what classes are anyway).
You can make a character designed specifially for how you want to play. Do you want to PvE, PvP, solo, group or some combination of those? No problem, just design your character to do that.
Want to make a toon with the same abilities as a character in some book or movie? No problem.
Want to make a plate wearing - fireball throwing - healer with a pet? No problem. (Yes, if skills are done as I imagine there are several FAIR ways to prevent hybrids from overpowering non-hybrids)
BTW, developers have this idea that they must enforce balance between all characters so that nobody is too underpowered compared to someone else. This is only necessary with games based on classes because of the very fact that the classes don't give players any freedom to define their own character. If a player were able to design their own character and it was terrible in PvP it wouldn't be the developers fault, it would be the player's.
I think the original question is wrong. Games should be level AND skill based. I think the idea of 'classes' is an archaic leftover from the pen and paper days; although they do make it easier for new players to get into a game. And the concept of having to use a skill in order for it to keep its effectiveness sounds good on the surface but is annoying and tedious in practice (WoW's weapon skills are a good example). If you do levels and skills together you get the following benefits: (I'm assuming that skills are only learned once and are usefull from that point on, never have prerequisites or level restrictions, and don't have to be used to retain usefulness. It is possible to do this btw.) PvP is a true test of skill because you have no idea what your opponent can do. No more "He's wearing cloth and has a big blue pet so I know he'll do this and then I'll do that and then..." When it is like that the combat is 90% predetermined by class (and plz don't argue that point, I've heard all the arguments before). With a level+skill system the way I'm thinking of it a player wearing cloth might not know any spells at all and will dice you into little scooby-snacks. PvP would require reacting to the combat rather than predicting it. You can STILL provide players with classes to pick from if they want to simply by defining a preset selection of skills for the player to learn as they level (which is really what classes are anyway). You can make a character designed specifially for how you want to play. Do you want to PvE, PvP, solo, group or some combination of those? No problem, just design your character to do that. Want to make a toon with the same abilities as a character in some book or movie? No problem. Want to make a plate wearing - fireball throwing - healer with a pet? No problem. (Yes, if skills are done as I imagine there are several FAIR ways to prevent hybrids from overpowering non-hybrids) BTW, developers have this idea that they must enforce balance between all characters so that nobody is too underpowered compared to someone else. This is only necessary with games based on classes because of the very fact that the classes don't give players any freedom to define their own character. If a player were able to design their own character and it was terrible in PvP it wouldn't be the developers fault, it would be the player's.
Hmm... haven't been checking this thread, so I guess this is a late reply to this...
I do understand what you are saying, but then again, the reason I group level with class is because that's what it normally associate with. But as for me, I wanted a game where it is skill-based system and contains vast numbers of professions/class, yet without the need to set levels. Maybe there will be a system of ranks, but it doesn't affect the stats or power of the characters.
Because if you do skill with level, which system is main? if it's skill then the level become a rank system to the skills. If level is main then there is no difference between class/level system. (i.e. the CU in SWG changed the skill/profession system into the level/profession system, and it played a too large factor in combat-related contents.)
But it is nice that there are people thinking on the pros and cons of each system, and what it can and cannot do.
In answer to the question about which would be the main system in my above post, skill or level, I'd have to say skills.
Levels are a way of determining how many skills you earn (say one skill every odd numbered level) and they give a rough estimate of how powerful a character is compared to other players in order to help with group creation, levels also give a feeling of accomplishment, and finally levels are a good way to define when a player should be rewarded (Like at level 20 you can get a mount or at level 40 you can buy a house).
Think of it this way, in current games that use classes a class is simply a collection of skills pre-picked by the developer. If you pull all of those skills out of the classes and make them available for anyone to choose from then you give people the ability to make a character of their own design.
Did I mention before that skills automatically scale with your level? Your stats would modify the effectiveness of most skills though, to promote more differentiation between characters.
Examples of what skills would be:
A Magic Bolt
A melee weapon attack that causes bleeding
Having a combat pet (Some powerful skills like this would require spending more skill points of course)
The armor type you can wear (cloth is free)
And I'm also thinking that if you earn a skill for each odd numbered level then on even numbered levels you earn points to put into your stats. That way you are rewarded every level with things that actually matter.
I have the entire system worked out but I hate to post it because it is so easy for people to misunderstand the written word. I'd spend the next two months trying to correct the misunderstandings. It's a shame too because it would work and it wouldn't be any harder to code than a class-based game (I'm a programmer so I can say that
In my opinion the whole point of RPGs is power and freedom. It's not the story, the community, the economics, or any of that "content". RPGs are about making the coolest or most powerful character you can and all of the other stuff is great and necessary but is also beside the point. In other words, the extra content is critical but it isn't the MOST critical aspect of an RPG. The first developer to realize that RPGs are primarily about power and freedom will crush the competition (unless they royally screw something up).
Imagine you have two games that are exactly the same in every way except that game X gives players 8 classes to choose from and game Y gives you the same 8 classes but also gives you the ability to create characters of your own design. Which game are you going to buy?
I got waaay off track but hopefully that gives you a better idea of how a skill AND level system would work.
Although most MMORPGs Ive played have been class based. I know all the "Grass is greener" complex that comes from players from one class envying those of another. Be it justified or not.
I would prefer a solid skill based system. If only to eliminate that aspect of MMORPGs
Skills allow much freedom and are wonderful for soloing, but when it comes to grouping, I rather have class and know who does what, it help a LOT to build group and have a role and be successfull. I don't mind if the player can switch class on the same character, but it has to be clear what class everyone is.
I also like that the players are kinda unique. So a class system such as CoV would be perfect...even if you find someone with your primary and secondary (which is a player on a hundred and 25...if you take a cookie cutter set, maybe a player on 40), he is likely to be significantly different. Failing to do such, I would like some huge difference among the same class...so individuals can all demark themselves positively with an aspect or another.
So, if you must have something simple as EQ was, with a few classes only...then make it so that there are ways to differiencate players. Maybe a cleric have better heals but is wearing silk armor, another cleric has the best buffs, another cleric never has a shortage of mana whatever he does...these are merely example, but in a game such as EQ, you would need at least 5 specialisations that make a HUGE difference on every character...for the tanks, their specialisation could be against a type of enemy, or against a precise form of attacks.
Individuality is important, but not at the cost of the specialisation and the unique role...I always want more classes. For a group, it is easy to know what you do with your class, and then learn what you are very good with once they group with you; in action.
Skills to work well for a grouping game, require soo much comple ramifications (taking skill X requires skill Y while you can only take 2 skills or whatever), that I rather have a simpler system, class. Class = simple. Simple is good. Simple isn't stupid. Yet, it can be developped a few steps further, to make sure players keep an individuality.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Ehm, it seems like it turned out into a discussion (as always) but I'll just say I want a skill based game as long as it's balanced. If there is "ultimate skill combination" skill based=phail, but when it's well balanced it will be a hell of a lot more fun.
Skill slots that you can fill with whatever skills you want, after you have learned them. But they have to be finite so you can't have every skill at once, you have to trade them out.
Also, no skill levels make all skills a one time learning, I think the player should be the one improving, the character is just the vessel for the player. And besides skill levels just like regular levels creates long repetitive tasks for you to do.
Skills should just be a way to frame out what your character is better adapted for, not how good they are, that should reflect the players in my opinion.
On a tangent,
No matter if you do skills, classes or whatever. If you are going to have magic you will have a hard time balancing the game. Magic isn't real so it isn't bound by rules of logic or common sense, so it can really do anything you want it too, and can trump any other skill.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
The skill based systems aren't really that different from a level based system. Star Wars Galaxies used something that was more like a level system even though people call it a skill system. They would earn experience for a certain skill and then level it up. It was similiar to D&D 3rd edition where you could take a level from any class when you leveled up. A skill system wouldn't have any levels like Ultima Online. It would just have skills that would go up by a percentage amount. Both systems are fine. I also like to have a lot of different options, but I find having different classes gives you a lot more unique abilities per class.
One thought about skill-based: Seems it would allow you to change a character after you've invested a great deal of time in it. Example, I played a warrior in a game to a high level, then decided it really wasn't for me. Rolled an alt caster and loved it, but had to repeat so so much. Would have been nice to just start practicing the casting skills that were interesting to me, instead of having to go back through all the same content and re-explore the map, etc. Character customization from the outset is definitely nice, but character change later in its "career" is just as attractive to me. [But, I'm sure companies see it as more profitable if a player has to replay the whole game to try an alt. More time = more cash.]
I think you would have to repeat content anyway. Your skills in magic or whatever would be to weak to do anything to the current mobs you are fighting so you would have to go back and fight something that the new skills would be effective on. I recall having to do that in Ultima Online.
Comments
Skill Based no contest
I can't stand all these new games that everyone at a certain lvl is no better than the next at that lvl. I feel that skill based systems give much more realism and free mobility in a game if i want to be a healer and then later descide maybe i should have been a fighter i want that option without starting a new avatar.
Ignore the sig its no longer valid
http://genocide.mofiki.com - Browser based mmorpg
Skill based, why?
With level based system it's obvious that the higher level player will most likely win in pvp. In a skill based system it's the person who makes the right choices at the right time that will determines the victor. Class just limits what a person can do. If you're in a rock, paper, scissors type of game you can tell who's what and already know if you can or can't counter it. Play it long enough and you can predict what anyone's going to do. Some may like this kind of system but it gets very dull and boring. In a skill based game you have little or no clue as to what your opponent is going to do. The freedom to choose whatever skills to aid you on your journey to save the world or destroy it makes the game that much more enjoyable to play.
In a level based system your players are made up of newbies, lower levels and the ever so snotty high levels. I hate this kind of community. In all the games I’ve played a lot the higher levels think they're some high class hot shot who wouldn't even talk to you just because your level is lower then theirs. Kids like this kind of system because it makes them feel superior to the next guy with a lower number.
Level and class based systems have been done to death. Remember the good old games before levels started to become a staple in rpg? They're some of the funniest games to play. Obtaining a new skill or power up felt like you actually archived something important. Where your items and skills could be used when you obtained them. Where level only increase stat points and didn't limit your character's choice in their progression throughout the game. I want that kind of feeling again.
I think the original question is wrong. Games should be level AND skill based. I think the idea of 'classes' is an archaic leftover from the pen and paper days; although they do make it easier for new players to get into a game. And the concept of having to use a skill in order for it to keep its effectiveness sounds good on the surface but is annoying and tedious in practice (WoW's weapon skills are a good example).
If you do levels and skills together you get the following benefits:
(I'm assuming that skills are only learned once and are usefull from that point on, never have prerequisites or level restrictions, and don't have to be used to retain usefulness. It is possible to do this btw.)
PvP is a true test of skill because you have no idea what your opponent can do. No more "He's wearing cloth and has a big blue pet so I know he'll do this and then I'll do that and then..." When it is like that the combat is 90% predetermined by class (and plz don't argue that point, I've heard all the arguments before). With a level+skill system the way I'm thinking of it a player wearing cloth might not know any spells at all and will dice you into little scooby-snacks. PvP would require reacting to the combat rather than predicting it.
You can STILL provide players with classes to pick from if they want to simply by defining a preset selection of skills for the player to learn as they level (which is really what classes are anyway).
You can make a character designed specifially for how you want to play. Do you want to PvE, PvP, solo, group or some combination of those? No problem, just design your character to do that.
Want to make a toon with the same abilities as a character in some book or movie? No problem.
Want to make a plate wearing - fireball throwing - healer with a pet? No problem. (Yes, if skills are done as I imagine there are several FAIR ways to prevent hybrids from overpowering non-hybrids)
BTW, developers have this idea that they must enforce balance between all characters so that nobody is too underpowered compared to someone else. This is only necessary with games based on classes because of the very fact that the classes don't give players any freedom to define their own character. If a player were able to design their own character and it was terrible in PvP it wouldn't be the developers fault, it would be the player's.
Hmm... haven't been checking this thread, so I guess this is a late reply to this...
I do understand what you are saying, but then again, the reason I group level with class is because that's what it normally associate with. But as for me, I wanted a game where it is skill-based system and contains vast numbers of professions/class, yet without the need to set levels. Maybe there will be a system of ranks, but it doesn't affect the stats or power of the characters.
Because if you do skill with level, which system is main? if it's skill then the level become a rank system to the skills. If level is main then there is no difference between class/level system. (i.e. the CU in SWG changed the skill/profession system into the level/profession system, and it played a too large factor in combat-related contents.)
But it is nice that there are people thinking on the pros and cons of each system, and what it can and cannot do.
Current MMO: FFXIV:ARR
Past MMO: Way too many (P2P and F2P)
In answer to the question about which would be the main system in my above post, skill or level, I'd have to say skills.
Levels are a way of determining how many skills you earn (say one skill every odd numbered level) and they give a rough estimate of how powerful a character is compared to other players in order to help with group creation, levels also give a feeling of accomplishment, and finally levels are a good way to define when a player should be rewarded (Like at level 20 you can get a mount or at level 40 you can buy a house).
Think of it this way, in current games that use classes a class is simply a collection of skills pre-picked by the developer. If you pull all of those skills out of the classes and make them available for anyone to choose from then you give people the ability to make a character of their own design.
Did I mention before that skills automatically scale with your level? Your stats would modify the effectiveness of most skills though, to promote more differentiation between characters.
Examples of what skills would be:
A Magic Bolt
A melee weapon attack that causes bleeding
Having a combat pet (Some powerful skills like this would require spending more skill points of course)
The armor type you can wear (cloth is free)
And I'm also thinking that if you earn a skill for each odd numbered level then on even numbered levels you earn points to put into your stats. That way you are rewarded every level with things that actually matter.
I have the entire system worked out but I hate to post it because it is so easy for people to misunderstand the written word. I'd spend the next two months trying to correct the misunderstandings. It's a shame too because it would work and it wouldn't be any harder to code than a class-based game (I'm a programmer so I can say that
In my opinion the whole point of RPGs is power and freedom. It's not the story, the community, the economics, or any of that "content". RPGs are about making the coolest or most powerful character you can and all of the other stuff is great and necessary but is also beside the point. In other words, the extra content is critical but it isn't the MOST critical aspect of an RPG. The first developer to realize that RPGs are primarily about power and freedom will crush the competition (unless they royally screw something up).
Imagine you have two games that are exactly the same in every way except that game X gives players 8 classes to choose from and game Y gives you the same 8 classes but also gives you the ability to create characters of your own design. Which game are you going to buy?
I got waaay off track but hopefully that gives you a better idea of how a skill AND level system would work.
skill based. no question about it.
Although most MMORPGs Ive played have been class based. I know all the "Grass is greener" complex that comes from players from one class envying those of another. Be it justified or not.
I would prefer a solid skill based system. If only to eliminate that aspect of MMORPGs
Torrential
Torrential: DAOC (Pendragon)
Awned: World of Warcraft (Lothar)
Torren: Warhammer Online (Praag)
Class and levels for grouping.
Skills allow much freedom and are wonderful for soloing, but when it comes to grouping, I rather have class and know who does what, it help a LOT to build group and have a role and be successfull. I don't mind if the player can switch class on the same character, but it has to be clear what class everyone is.
I also like that the players are kinda unique. So a class system such as CoV would be perfect...even if you find someone with your primary and secondary (which is a player on a hundred and 25...if you take a cookie cutter set, maybe a player on 40), he is likely to be significantly different. Failing to do such, I would like some huge difference among the same class...so individuals can all demark themselves positively with an aspect or another.
So, if you must have something simple as EQ was, with a few classes only...then make it so that there are ways to differiencate players. Maybe a cleric have better heals but is wearing silk armor, another cleric has the best buffs, another cleric never has a shortage of mana whatever he does...these are merely example, but in a game such as EQ, you would need at least 5 specialisations that make a HUGE difference on every character...for the tanks, their specialisation could be against a type of enemy, or against a precise form of attacks.
Individuality is important, but not at the cost of the specialisation and the unique role...I always want more classes. For a group, it is easy to know what you do with your class, and then learn what you are very good with once they group with you; in action.
Skills to work well for a grouping game, require soo much comple ramifications (taking skill X requires skill Y while you can only take 2 skills or whatever), that I rather have a simpler system, class. Class = simple. Simple is good. Simple isn't stupid. Yet, it can be developped a few steps further, to make sure players keep an individuality.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
Skill based, because it allows you to create your character according to how YOU want, not according to how the game company wants you to be.
.
Ehm, it seems like it turned out into a discussion (as always) but I'll just say I want a skill based game as long as it's balanced. If there is "ultimate skill combination" skill based=phail, but when it's well balanced it will be a hell of a lot more fun.
Skill slots that you can fill with whatever skills you want, after you have learned them. But they have to be finite so you can't have every skill at once, you have to trade them out.
Also, no skill levels make all skills a one time learning, I think the player should be the one improving, the character is just the vessel for the player. And besides skill levels just like regular levels creates long repetitive tasks for you to do.
Skills should just be a way to frame out what your character is better adapted for, not how good they are, that should reflect the players in my opinion.
On a tangent,
No matter if you do skills, classes or whatever. If you are going to have magic you will have a hard time balancing the game. Magic isn't real so it isn't bound by rules of logic or common sense, so it can really do anything you want it too, and can trump any other skill.
Don't you worry little buddy. You're dealing with a man of honor. However, honor requires a higher percentage of profit
The skill based systems aren't really that different from a level based system. Star Wars Galaxies used something that was more like a level system even though people call it a skill system. They would earn experience for a certain skill and then level it up. It was similiar to D&D 3rd edition where you could take a level from any class when you leveled up. A skill system wouldn't have any levels like Ultima Online. It would just have skills that would go up by a percentage amount. Both systems are fine. I also like to have a lot of different options, but I find having different classes gives you a lot more unique abilities per class.
One thought about skill-based: Seems it would allow you to change a character after you've invested a great deal of time in it. Example, I played a warrior in a game to a high level, then decided it really wasn't for me. Rolled an alt caster and loved it, but had to repeat so so much. Would have been nice to just start practicing the casting skills that were interesting to me, instead of having to go back through all the same content and re-explore the map, etc. Character customization from the outset is definitely nice, but character change later in its "career" is just as attractive to me. [But, I'm sure companies see it as more profitable if a player has to replay the whole game to try an alt. More time = more cash.]
I think you would have to repeat content anyway. Your skills in magic or whatever would be to weak to do anything to the current mobs you are fighting so you would have to go back and fight something that the new skills would be effective on. I recall having to do that in Ultima Online.