Why not tell David Stern (NBA Commissioner) to forgo each season and just start with NBA playoffs. Because after all those 82 regular season games are meaningless anyway kinda like the levels to get to max. If you think like this you shouldnt be in the genre.
Originally posted by feena750 EQ Next is doing this. Allowing the whole world to be available to everyone, instead of segmented by levels. I think eventually that is where MMORPGs will head.
Was this a new announcement I missed?
The game was clearly described as having Tiers of content, gated by gear, if you didn't have Tier 3 gear, you couldn't do Tier 3 content for example.
Look at this EQN whiteboard sketch showing Tiers (see that red T3 barrier)
Not sure if you're being sarcastic.. so..
I'm pretty sure this is tiers of land and not tiers of gear/progression..
DAOC never raised the level cap among a half dozen expansions
Yes and no.
While they always stuck to the level 50 cap, they certainly provided for additional progression in terms of the realm rank system (which went from 10L /10L to 15/15 eventually), the TOA expansion added a whole slew of special abilities you had to go out and raid for rather than level for, but I suppose in the spirit of things, they kept it stable.
Camelot Unchained appears to be making the PVP of DAOC it's endgame, and centering a bulk of its activities on just that one area.
For a PVE focused MMO, you could focus on nothing but dungeons and instance content, but then you'd pretty much just have WOW without the levels.
I suppose the OP was thinking more in terms of just taking your character into the game world an adventuring with him or her, with no real regards to progression, which might be fine, but would not really be a MMORPG in the traditional mold.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I personally like end-game and don't really care for the kill 20 of this or that or very shallow storylines. You could create story driven content that acts as end-game content though.
meh... If it wasn't kill 20 critters, it'd just be capture 20 towers and instead of earning experience like pre-endgame content it'd be earn RP or Honor or some other meaningless currency. You'd still have a gear grind or a pvp ability grind or some other grind they make you do to keep you busy while they come up with new content.
That's usually how progression works. No one wants to do anything for no reward or gear with the same stats as what you had before, and so they have to up the reward or quality just a little bit each time or gamers will stop doing it.
Making great story-driven content is all well and good, but eventually you have to add something to fill the gap between content releases and so you add in quests that require you to do xx amount of raids instead of just completing them once, making the act of raiding a grind in itself.
Originally posted by CowboyHatSo what kind of content would you suggest for end game? Progressive raiding and PvP?
It is already done for pvp.
LoL, WoT, Starconflict ... are all instanced pvp games with no leveling "quest" progression.
None of those are MMORPG though~
Yeah I went there~
True .. but by some definitions, they are MMOs. You cannot have a mmoRPG with just end game, because you have to lose the leveling up part, and no longer make it a proper RPG.
Better yet, make the entire progression enjoyable and take several years to complete. I can't forget how long it took to level my characters in EQ and I enjoyed every minute of it. Not saying an EQ clone is in order but making the game enjoyable is far more important than worrying about "end game". When that phrase didn't exist, mmo's were more enjoyable.
Originally posted by Kilrain Better yet, make the entire progression enjoyable and take several years to complete. I can't forget how long it took to level my characters in EQ and I enjoyed every minute of it. Not saying an EQ clone is in order but making the game enjoyable is far more important than worrying about "end game". When that phrase didn't exist, mmo's were more enjoyable.
Better yet, make the entire progression enjoyable and take several days to complete. I can't forget how long it took to level my characters in EQ and I find it quite boring. An EQ clone is out of the question and making the game enjoyable is far more important than stretch out leveling to a glacier pace. When it took too long to level, mmo's were much less enjoyable.
Originally posted by CowboyHatSo what kind of content would you suggest for end game? Progressive raiding and PvP?
It is already done for pvp.
LoL, WoT, Starconflict ... are all instanced pvp games with no leveling "quest" progression.
None of those are MMORPG though~
Yeah I went there~
True .. but by some definitions, they are MMOs. You cannot have a mmoRPG with just end game, because you have to lose the leveling up part, and no longer make it a proper RPG.
Games where the whole content consists in instanced gameplay with only a dozen of players maximum are not MMOs. There's no big persistent part of some world in those games - there's actually no world at all per se.
Unless you are going to pretend that Doom, Quake and Unreal are MMOs.
Originally posted by nariusseldon Originally posted by KilrainBetter yet, make the entire progression enjoyable and take several years to complete. I can't forget how long it took to level my characters in EQ and I enjoyed every minute of it. Not saying an EQ clone is in order but making the game enjoyable is far more important than worrying about "end game". When that phrase didn't exist, mmo's were more enjoyable.
Better yet, make the entire progression enjoyable and take several days to complete. I can't forget how long it took to level my characters in EQ and I find it quite boring. An EQ clone is out of the question and making the game enjoyable is far more important than stretch out leveling to a glacier pace. When it took too long to level, mmo's were much less enjoyable.
Why is it that you can't seem to tolerate any game or genre having different goals than yours? We get it- you like to be able to complete content solo and don't personally want to have to devote large periods of time in a sitting to spending in game particularly *gasp* socializing with others. Multiple posters here have commented that your particular goals in games identify more strongly with the gameplay designed for single player/offline games. Is there a reason you choose MMORPGs as opposed to single player games that are more suited to your gaming preferences or do you just enjoy being obstinate and disagreeable to others?
Originally posted by CowboyHatSo what kind of content would you suggest for end game? Progressive raiding and PvP?
It is already done for pvp.
LoL, WoT, Starconflict ... are all instanced pvp games with no leveling "quest" progression.
None of those are MMORPG though~
Yeah I went there~
True .. but by some definitions, they are MMOs. You cannot have a mmoRPG with just end game, because you have to lose the leveling up part, and no longer make it a proper RPG.
Games where the whole content consists in instanced gameplay with only a dozen of players maximum are not MMOs. There's no big persistent part of some world in those games - there's actually no world at all per se.
Unless you are going to pretend that Doom, Quake and Unreal are MMOs.
That is not the definition used by industry research firms, or even this site. D3 and LOL are listed under "MMO" here. So no .. you don't need a virtual world.
It is just a convenient label. The reason that Quake and Unreal are not categorized as such is just because of historical reasons. I bet Destiny will be classified as such, and it does not have a persistent world.
Originally posted by CowboyHatSo what kind of content would you suggest for end game? Progressive raiding and PvP?
It is already done for pvp.
LoL, WoT, Starconflict ... are all instanced pvp games with no leveling "quest" progression.
None of those are MMORPG though~
Yeah I went there~
True .. but by some definitions, they are MMOs. You cannot have a mmoRPG with just end game, because you have to lose the leveling up part, and no longer make it a proper RPG.
Games where the whole content consists in instanced gameplay with only a dozen of players maximum are not MMOs. There's no big persistent part of some world in those games - there's actually no world at all per se.
Unless you are going to pretend that Doom, Quake and Unreal are MMOs.
That is not the definition used by industry research firms, or even this site. D3 and LOL are listed under "MMO" here. So no .. you don't need a virtual world.
It is just a convenient label. The reason that Quake and Unreal are not categorized as such is just because of historical reasons. I bet Destiny will be classified as such, and it does not have a persistent world.
Yeah, I know that if it served your "arguments" (if you have any), even "Solitaire" would be classified as a MMO.
This site mixes multiplayer and massively multiplayer games - and this site is made by humans, humans looking for funds and sponsors. Therefore this site can be just as wrong as everything else created by humans, actually even more since part of it is driven by money greed.
"Massively" is pretty self explanatory. It means a large part of the game takes place in a world where a massive amount of players share the same space. This isn't true for neither D3 not LOL. Neither D3 nor LOL, and nor WoT allow a massive amount of players to share the same space.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I know exactly what you are doing here. I won't answer anymore after this post. It was just to let you know not everyone here is fooled by your posts.
OP, I've been saying that ever since the industry decided to churn out MMORPGs that people can max out in a week, lol.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
Originally posted by goldtoof NariStill doesn't make them mmos.It makes them popular games that mmorpg might as well cash in on for site traffick.
Ya those aren't MMOs; they are just games which this site hopes will choose to advertsie here. :P
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
A couple of people quoted me and stated that GW2 didn't start at end game.
If their idea of starting at end game is having their newly created character spawn at max level with full skill points to distribute then GW2 doesn't fall into that. If they were expecting a game where as soon as the character gets plopped down they can go roam the world without restriction, GW2 isn't that. If that's what the OP was talking about, then scratch GW2 off the list.
But if their idea of end game is the activity, commonly raiding and PvP, then they can do that in GW2 even if they are not at max level. They can join WvWvW at level 1, where they will be scaled upwards. On the PvE side, GW2 doesn't really have 40-man instanced raids, but like I said earlier they will face bosses in the outside world just the same thanks to DEs. There is no drastic change in playstyle at max level, unlike most MMOs.
Generally the leveling process acts as a gateway to your character class / role, and the world you are playing in. Of course, some games have such simplistic mechanics, lore, and environments, that there's probably no reason for bothering with levels. GW2 is a prime example.
Comments
Not sure if you're being sarcastic.. so..
I'm pretty sure this is tiers of land and not tiers of gear/progression..
It is already done for pvp.
LoL, WoT, Starconflict ... are all instanced pvp games with no leveling "quest" progression.
Yes and no.
While they always stuck to the level 50 cap, they certainly provided for additional progression in terms of the realm rank system (which went from 10L /10L to 15/15 eventually), the TOA expansion added a whole slew of special abilities you had to go out and raid for rather than level for, but I suppose in the spirit of things, they kept it stable.
Camelot Unchained appears to be making the PVP of DAOC it's endgame, and centering a bulk of its activities on just that one area.
For a PVE focused MMO, you could focus on nothing but dungeons and instance content, but then you'd pretty much just have WOW without the levels.
I suppose the OP was thinking more in terms of just taking your character into the game world an adventuring with him or her, with no real regards to progression, which might be fine, but would not really be a MMORPG in the traditional mold.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
meh... If it wasn't kill 20 critters, it'd just be capture 20 towers and instead of earning experience like pre-endgame content it'd be earn RP or Honor or some other meaningless currency. You'd still have a gear grind or a pvp ability grind or some other grind they make you do to keep you busy while they come up with new content.
That's usually how progression works. No one wants to do anything for no reward or gear with the same stats as what you had before, and so they have to up the reward or quality just a little bit each time or gamers will stop doing it.
Making great story-driven content is all well and good, but eventually you have to add something to fill the gap between content releases and so you add in quests that require you to do xx amount of raids instead of just completing them once, making the act of raiding a grind in itself.
LoL, WoT, Starconflict ... are all instanced pvp games with no leveling "quest" progression.
None of those are MMORPG though~
Yeah I went there~
True .. but by some definitions, they are MMOs. You cannot have a mmoRPG with just end game, because you have to lose the leveling up part, and no longer make it a proper RPG.
Better yet, make the entire progression enjoyable and take several days to complete. I can't forget how long it took to level my characters in EQ and I find it quite boring. An EQ clone is out of the question and making the game enjoyable is far more important than stretch out leveling to a glacier pace. When it took too long to level, mmo's were much less enjoyable.
EVE and planetside 2 drop you in at end game for a start.
Games where the whole content consists in instanced gameplay with only a dozen of players maximum are not MMOs. There's no big persistent part of some world in those games - there's actually no world at all per se.
Unless you are going to pretend that Doom, Quake and Unreal are MMOs.
My computer is better than yours.
Better yet, make the entire progression enjoyable and take several days to complete. I can't forget how long it took to level my characters in EQ and I find it quite boring. An EQ clone is out of the question and making the game enjoyable is far more important than stretch out leveling to a glacier pace. When it took too long to level, mmo's were much less enjoyable.
Why is it that you can't seem to tolerate any game or genre having different goals than yours? We get it- you like to be able to complete content solo and don't personally want to have to devote large periods of time in a sitting to spending in game particularly *gasp* socializing with others. Multiple posters here have commented that your particular goals in games identify more strongly with the gameplay designed for single player/offline games. Is there a reason you choose MMORPGs as opposed to single player games that are more suited to your gaming preferences or do you just enjoy being obstinate and disagreeable to others?
That is not the definition used by industry research firms, or even this site. D3 and LOL are listed under "MMO" here. So no .. you don't need a virtual world.
It is just a convenient label. The reason that Quake and Unreal are not categorized as such is just because of historical reasons. I bet Destiny will be classified as such, and it does not have a persistent world.
Just because some orwellian marketing dude decided to call a game a mmo doesn't make it one.
Just because blizzard wanted to make money off the auction house by pretending its a mmo doesn't magically make it one.
Yeah, I know that if it served your "arguments" (if you have any), even "Solitaire" would be classified as a MMO.
This site mixes multiplayer and massively multiplayer games - and this site is made by humans, humans looking for funds and sponsors. Therefore this site can be just as wrong as everything else created by humans, actually even more since part of it is driven by money greed.
"Massively" is pretty self explanatory. It means a large part of the game takes place in a world where a massive amount of players share the same space. This isn't true for neither D3 not LOL. Neither D3 nor LOL, and nor WoT allow a massive amount of players to share the same space.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I know exactly what you are doing here. I won't answer anymore after this post. It was just to let you know not everyone here is fooled by your posts.
My computer is better than yours.
OP, I've been saying that ever since the industry decided to churn out MMORPGs that people can max out in a week, lol.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
and this site also called it so.
I will direct you to the "game list" tab up top. If you click on it, you will see
"MMORPG Gamelist - All MMO Games" and D3, LoL are listed under them.
That's not really endgame though, they just drop you into game. Nothing ended, thus no endgame.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
Still doesn't make them mmos.
It makes them popular games that mmorpg might as well cash in on for site traffick.
As if you are the authority.
I will take the industry, and MMORPG sites' opinions over yours. Thank you very much.
Ya those aren't MMOs; they are just games which this site hopes will choose to advertsie here. :P
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
For once, I 200% agree with Arclan.
My computer is better than yours.
A couple of people quoted me and stated that GW2 didn't start at end game.
If their idea of starting at end game is having their newly created character spawn at max level with full skill points to distribute then GW2 doesn't fall into that. If they were expecting a game where as soon as the character gets plopped down they can go roam the world without restriction, GW2 isn't that. If that's what the OP was talking about, then scratch GW2 off the list.
But if their idea of end game is the activity, commonly raiding and PvP, then they can do that in GW2 even if they are not at max level. They can join WvWvW at level 1, where they will be scaled upwards. On the PvE side, GW2 doesn't really have 40-man instanced raids, but like I said earlier they will face bosses in the outside world just the same thanks to DEs. There is no drastic change in playstyle at max level, unlike most MMOs.
Generally the leveling process acts as a gateway to your character class / role, and the world you are playing in. Of course, some games have such simplistic mechanics, lore, and environments, that there's probably no reason for bothering with levels. GW2 is a prime example.
You make me like charity