Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Which type of skill progression sounds more interesting?

245

Comments

  • deniterdeniter Member RarePosts: 1,438
    Steelhelm said:
    Because I'm not a fan of end-game and with all these systems you will be at a skill cap and devs have to create more content. The way I've thought of a system it would be something like this:

    No skill progression. No levels. No classes.
    Basic attributes like strength, agility, intelligence, stamina. Everyone starts the same. Perhaps there'll be some racial abilities. Abilities like fireball and different weapon strikes are gathered through questing. The power of any certain ability would depend on the corresponding attribute value.

    That's basically it. Attribute values could be raised through temporary buffs(that are also abilities like spells) and magical items.

    So the game progress(if desired) would be about gathering abilities through questing and acquiring gear through crafting and slaying monsters. Of course there could be other kind of progress like creating a guild(making friends), building a house, decorating a house, building a fortress, territorial pvp on some part of the map etc

    A bit out of the topic, but yeah..
    I like this a lot. This is what i've posted about some time ago; to have no levels and let your gear and skills define your power. Getting those skills should be a long journey, tho, not some mundane task.

    I hate this typical design where you can beat other player even without gear and weapon if you're few dozen levels higher, or if you're able to pvp naked so you don't lose any gear upon death. Besides, it only makes sense your attributes like str and sta don't raise unless you wear or wield gear that does it magically.
  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member LegendaryPosts: 7,671
    FFXI, enough said.
  • anemoanemo Member RarePosts: 1,903
    I liked Haven and Hearth with it's crafting based progression.

    Based on what you eat it fills your FEP bar(IE: meat gains STR, while something complex like apple pie gains Lots of Constitution and a small amount of other stats).  After the FEP bar is filled up you gain a stat randomly based on how it's filled up(If you only had strength you'd get strength, if you has 75% str/25% constitution it'd be those  percents for your chances).

    Then for gaining skills you'd have curios(Crafted items) that you would attach to yourself.  You'd gain time based progression based on what was attached.  IE: small amount for pinecone(A gathering check), a bit more if you turned the pinecone into a rabbit with two leaves(Gathering + 1 craft check), and a lot more if you made a statuette out of gold(Dozens of checks accross Gathering/Crafting/Smithing/Organizations).

    Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.

    "At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."

  • breadm1xbreadm1x Member UncommonPosts: 374
    edited January 2016
    Do games actualy have skill progression ?
    They used to have, like every level u get 5 points to put in a stat hp magic dex str and so.
    But nowdays everything is EZ mode, everyone walks around doing the same thing.
    Nowdays u hit 4 mobs and u hit max level.
    Crafting is 99% of the time useless, since u need to grind raid for the "gear" and then buy shit in IM's with dollars to have a better "chance" to upgrade it.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,857
    A combination of all 3.

    Have a system like EVE for the baseline. You can increase this rate based on skills frequently used, and then characters can specialize by earning distribution to put into a set of electives. Incorporate caps or a DR system, so potential new players can eventually catch up down the road.
  • QuesaQuesa Member UncommonPosts: 1,432
    A combination of all 3.

    Have a system like EVE for the baseline. You can increase this rate based on skills frequently used, and then characters can specialize by earning distribution to put into a set of electives. Incorporate caps or a DR system, so potential new players can eventually catch up down the road.
    Increasing a time based system by actions defeats the purpose of a time based progression system.
    Star Citizen Referral Code: STAR-DPBM-Z2P4
  • LyrianLyrian Member UncommonPosts: 412
    You use it, it gets better. What's not to like? An applied point system can also be good depending on the setting of the game, but the one system I cannot stand is the Time-learning system. It essentially makes playing the game useless. If I can progress my character without playing the game, then why should I play the game?

    I don't accept a closing of the gap between the casual and the hardcore market or players, you play more, you should advance faster, and not only through gear, but everywhere.
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    I like having your skill go up when you perform a certain skill, but it has some drawbacks.  For instance if jumping makes your jump skill go higher then people will hop around until they max the skill out.  I'm not sure what the solution would be to that other than to tie multiple skills together in some way so that increasing one of that group increases others in that group as well.  For instance perhaps running, jumping, and swimming should all increase based on your physical conditioning.  They could all be grouped under something like athletics.
  • jmcdermottukjmcdermottuk Member RarePosts: 1,571
    Flyte27 said:
    I like having your skill go up when you perform a certain skill, but it has some drawbacks.  For instance if jumping makes your jump skill go higher then people will hop around until they max the skill out.  I'm not sure what the solution would be to that other than to tie multiple skills together in some way so that increasing one of that group increases others in that group as well.  For instance perhaps running, jumping, and swimming should all increase based on your physical conditioning.  They could all be grouped under something like athletics.
    The other alternative is not to take the skill system too far and have stupid skills in the first place. What benefit would anyone get from increasing a jump skill? Does the game have 10 foot walls you need to get over?

    Common sense goes a long way when deciding which skills to include and, more importantly, which to leave out. I don't see the need for running, jumping etc, seperately or all together under one skill unless they deplete Stamina and you have an actual Stamina bar that runs out, probably at slower/faster speeds depending on what you're doing.

    It all comes down to the level of realism you want.
  • deniterdeniter Member RarePosts: 1,438
    Flyte27 said:
    I like having your skill go up when you perform a certain skill, but it has some drawbacks.  For instance if jumping makes your jump skill go higher then people will hop around until they max the skill out.  I'm not sure what the solution would be to that other than to tie multiple skills together in some way so that increasing one of that group increases others in that group as well.  For instance perhaps running, jumping, and swimming should all increase based on your physical conditioning.  They could all be grouped under something like athletics.
    I'm not sure if it's even necessary to have a skill for jumping, running or swimming. If you really need it make it depend on the combination of your physical attributes rather than a skill, and the stuff you carry should also have an impact for the result somehow.

    Combat skills should go up only by attacking a target that makes a threat to you. I've read in some games people cast spells non-stop to nearby bushes to raise the casting skill, which is as silly as the jumping example.
  • khanstructkhanstruct Member UncommonPosts: 756
    deniter said:
    Steelhelm said:
    Because I'm not a fan of end-game and with all these systems you will be at a skill cap and devs have to create more content. The way I've thought of a system it would be something like this:

    No skill progression. No levels. No classes.
    Basic attributes like strength, agility, intelligence, stamina. Everyone starts the same. Perhaps there'll be some racial abilities. Abilities like fireball and different weapon strikes are gathered through questing. The power of any certain ability would depend on the corresponding attribute value.

    That's basically it. Attribute values could be raised through temporary buffs(that are also abilities like spells) and magical items.

    So the game progress(if desired) would be about gathering abilities through questing and acquiring gear through crafting and slaying monsters. Of course there could be other kind of progress like creating a guild(making friends), building a house, decorating a house, building a fortress, territorial pvp on some part of the map etc

    A bit out of the topic, but yeah..
    I like this a lot. This is what i've posted about some time ago; to have no levels and let your gear and skills define your power. Getting those skills should be a long journey, tho, not some mundane task.

    I hate this typical design where you can beat other player even without gear and weapon if you're few dozen levels higher, or if you're able to pvp naked so you don't lose any gear upon death. Besides, it only makes sense your attributes like str and sta don't raise unless you wear or wield gear that does it magically.
    Our cyberpunk game, X-Shift, is going to do something like this. You discover or unlock skills through gameplay and exploration. When you use a skill, it has a chance of increasing its "short term" rating, which will regress if you don't use it. As you use the skill consistently though, its "long term" rating improves (which is the cap at where short term will stop regressing).

    You skills have rating from 0.0 to 150.0 which are added to an "aspect", ranging from 1.0 to 50.0 for a max total of 200.0 (very long progression).

    You can have a maximum number of long term skill points equal to your Mind rating (combination of four aspects) x7, and your aspects can both increase and decrease as you play the game.

    Some other fun facts, you'll be able to "turn down" skills, which, if you're capped, will cause that skill to lose a point in order for another to improve. Also, there are ways that a skill can become a "natural skill" which, among other perks, it's points no longer count towards your cap.

    Whew.... that was a rant. But! Obviously that's the system I prefer... since I designed it.  ;)

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    edited January 2016
    Level-based* progression is clearly superior.
    • Increasing running skill is boring in use-based progression.  In use-based progression there is one activity that improves running, and that's running.  Running isn't fun. Worse yet, this system encourages using scripts to automate running.  Those scripts aren't fun, and the forced choice between doing that non-fun thing (scripting) or having a shitty run skill also isn't fun.
    • Increasing running skill is the most fun you can have in the game with level-based progression. This is because all game activity reward XP (killing, questing, crafting, exploring, etc).  Which means you can choose whichever of those you enjoy most to improve your run skill.
    Most use-based games avoid this most obvious mistake by simply not having run and jump skills (or any other skill where leveling it would mean engaging in an obviously boring activity.)

    The most notable recent use-based game (ESO) is mostly level-based, since that's the main way you unlock new skills.  It's also the main way you improve use-based skills, as you don't have to use a specific skill to level it typically, you just have to have it slotted while you earn XP.  So it's not a very use-based system at all but still provides a sort of use-based vibe, and that's why the system overall is fairly solid.

    So the root of why level-based systems are superior is that the player gets more control over what they do to level.  

    Of course the flip-side of that is you still need something forcing variety. Otherwise players burn themselves out. Which is where quests come in (you can kill Mob A ten times and get a quest XP bonus for it, but if you want the fastest rate of XP you're then going to have to switch to killing Mob B for the next quest.)  You can still kill Mob A forever (well, until it's too far under your level) if you want, but it's going to be slower than killing a variety of things. An ideal quest system continues to let players choose the activity (killing, crafting, etc) but forces them to vary what they're killing or crafting, and probably occasionally forces them to choose a second-tier activity (which often results in players realizing they enjoy more things than they initially thought they did.)

    (* By this I mean any variant of "centralized" progression, where the player's choice of multiple game activities provide the input (usually XP) and the output is progression. Countless variations exist, and not all of them literally involve "XP" and "levels".  The important concept is that the player can choose from that variety of inputs to advance their character; they're not forced into an activity they might not consider fun.)

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • khanstructkhanstruct Member UncommonPosts: 756
    Axehilt said:
    Level-based* progression is clearly superior.
    • Increasing running skill is boring in use-based progression.  In use-based progression there is one activity that improves running, and that's running.  Running isn't fun. Worse yet, this system encourages using scripts to automate running.  Those scripts aren't fun, and the forced choice between doing that non-fun thing (scripting) or having a shitty run skill also isn't fun.
    • Increasing running skill is the most fun you can have in the game with level-based progression. This is because all game activity reward XP (killing, questing, crafting, exploring, etc).  Which means you can choose whichever of those you enjoy most to improve your run skill.
    Most use-based games avoid this most obvious mistake by simply not having run and jump skills (or any other skill where leveling it would mean engaging in an obviously boring activity.)

    The most notable recent use-based game (ESO) is mostly level-based, since that's the main way you unlock new skills.  It's also the main way you improve use-based skills, as you don't have to use a specific skill to level it typically, you just have to have it slotted while you earn XP.  So it's not a very use-based system at all but still provides a sort of use-based vibe, and that's why the system overall is fairly solid.

    So the root of why level-based systems are superior is that the player gets more control over what they do to level.  But of course the flip side of that is you still need something to force some variety, otherwise players end up burning themselves out. (If a game never incentivized killing a different type of mob, players would bore themselves to death by killing one type of mob forever.  So most games let you choose the activity you enjoy (killing in this case) but force you to vary what you're killing periodically (usually through quest XP).)

    (* By this I mean any variant of "centralized" progression, where the player's choice of multiple game activities provide the input (usually XP) and the output is progression. Countless variations exist, and not all of them literally involve "XP" and "levels".  The important concept is that the player can choose from that variety of inputs to advance their character; they're not forced into an activity they might not consider fun.)
    But if you're not going to run, then why do you care if you improve your running skill? If you don't use a sword, why would you care about improving your sword skill? Or, on the flipside, if I need strength for the type of character I'm playing, why wouldn't any of my actions be using strength anyway?

    A true use-based system promotes realism and helps players build up the play style that they're actually using.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,857
    Quesa said:
    A combination of all 3.

    Have a system like EVE for the baseline. You can increase this rate based on skills frequently used, and then characters can specialize by earning distribution to put into a set of electives. Incorporate caps or a DR system, so potential new players can eventually catch up down the road.
    Increasing a time based system by actions defeats the purpose of a time based progression system.
    Maybe in the particular way you are imagining it. 
    Who says it has to be that way.
    It could easily work in different categorized skill sets.

  • mmoguy43mmoguy43 Member UncommonPosts: 2,770
    I think @Axehilt ment a mixed progression is superior. With the example given a plain level based or skill-use based progression is inferior than a mix of both.
  • JDis25JDis25 Member RarePosts: 1,353
    I think a skill system such as Morrowind is my preferred style. Skills that you level by actually performing actions, and traits that you can choose to deposit points into upon increasing player level.  These traits govern certain skills (ex: Intelligence would govern magic skills, Personality governs Mercantile).

    But this system works best without auto-scaling levels like Skyrim or Fallout 3/4
    Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War
    Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
  • Joseph_KerrJoseph_Kerr Member RarePosts: 1,113
    Too bad they dont do away with character levels altogether and only use character skill levels in mmo's. It makes me laugh when I see mmo's where level 50's have 20k+ hp and lvl 1's have 100 hp. This genre needs an enema!
  • FearumFearum Member UncommonPosts: 1,175
    I this the most interesting is this. Use a skill and get better at it, don't use a skill it gets worse.
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,775
    mmoguy43 said:

    Kilrain said:
    D3 type gear progression where skills & gear all have their own gameplay mechanics.

    One point here and one point there is so pedestrian, in comparison. 
    I don't play D3 so I don't know the specifics, but it sounds like a great system for PVE. Worth looking into more :)
    Basically it works as follow.

    Skill system - Every class (6 in total) has may be 25-30 skills. Each skill has 5 variations. Each variation can have a different mechanics. For example, the hydra skill of wizard has a version that shoot lightning (fast auto-targeting damage) and a version that lay down fire on the ground to burn mobs (so it is like a turret that make strips of burning ground). There are a lot of combination of skills you can use.

    Progression system - you earn all these by max level, and the legendary items (and sets) now have their own game play. For example, an wiz set bonus is to drop a different kind of meteor (again all different in properties and animation) every 2 seconds, rotating between 4 kinds. Another bonus is to have damage scale with the number of mobs you are burning (with fire skills).

    So it is a great system because, again, you are not dealing with one point here and there, but actual gameplay changes. 

    Very few companies can afford to make a system like this though, because there are so many mechanics to code & test for, and animation to make (for all the different type of meteor looks different).
    In other words, most of the D3's progression lies within your character level and the stats from your gear. Skill progression unlocks more gameplay options instead of making skills more powerful.
    Both. But the most powerful attributes you get is NOT stat based. It is game mechanics based.

    For example, one of the mage item will enable energy twister (basically a tornado) to suck mobs, within a certain radius, into the vortex, which makes good cc. Another item will double the damage of meteor (this one is a straight power up), and has good synergy to the set that generate free meteors.

    By now, there are hundreds of items with different properties. 

    The leveling up is trivial though. You can get to max level in a day or two, or even an hour or two if you have someone to power level you. The game is all about item hunt. 
  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    mmoguy43 said:
    I think @Axehilt ment a mixed progression is superior. With the example given a plain level based or skill-use based progression is inferior than a mix of both.
    I wouldn't say mixed is superior.

    Mainly I'm describing a common failure of use-based progression systems: forcing players to engage in shallow activities.

    Both mixed and level-based progression systems avoid that failure point.  Even a use-based system can do that (if a use-based game only has weapon skills, then combat is the only use-based activity players are forced to do, and combat tends to be the deepest activity in RPGs so it works out.)

    A good progression system is a series of interesting strategic choices for your character, so in order for a weapon-skill-only use-based progression system to be interesting you'd probably do something like having axe use generate Axe XP which you invest in the Axe Talent Tree which contains all sorts of strategic decisions related to an axe-user's playstyle.

    (Now that I think about it, that's nearly identical to FFXIV's job system.  When you equip an axe, you become a marauder and only earn marauder XP (ie Axe XP).  The main difference being FFXIV has virtually no strategic decisions in its progression system (all marauders are essentially the same with no playstyle variation within the class.)  An ideal system would provide more playstyle choices within that class choice.)

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504
    edited January 2016

    But if you're not going to run, then why do you care if you improve your running skill? If you don't use a sword, why would you care about improving your sword skill? Or, on the flipside, if I need strength for the type of character I'm playing, why wouldn't any of my actions be using strength anyway?

    A true use-based system promotes realism and helps players build up the play style that they're actually using.
    That's silly.  Everyone needs to run sometimes.  It's purely a matter of whether or not the game requires you to engage with a shallow activity (for potentially a very long time) to run well.

    It's the typical "game depth vs. realism" argument.  Most players want their skill to be challenged by a game, while others want shallow, repetitive realism.

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • AxehiltAxehilt Member RarePosts: 10,504

    JDis25 said:
    I think a skill system such as Morrowind is my preferred style. Skills that you level by actually performing actions, and traits that you can choose to deposit points into upon increasing player level.  These traits govern certain skills (ex: Intelligence would govern magic skills, Personality governs Mercantile).

    But this system works best without auto-scaling levels like Skyrim or Fallout 3/4
    So did you think Darkfall at launch was the bee's knees?

    Or would you admit that scripting your character to auto-run in place while you slept was maybe not the most interesting design for a game?

    "What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver

  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    Flyte27 said:
    I like having your skill go up when you perform a certain skill, but it has some drawbacks.  For instance if jumping makes your jump skill go higher then people will hop around until they max the skill out.  I'm not sure what the solution would be to that other than to tie multiple skills together in some way so that increasing one of that group increases others in that group as well.  For instance perhaps running, jumping, and swimming should all increase based on your physical conditioning.  They could all be grouped under something like athletics.
    The other alternative is not to take the skill system too far and have stupid skills in the first place. What benefit would anyone get from increasing a jump skill? Does the game have 10 foot walls you need to get over?

    Common sense goes a long way when deciding which skills to include and, more importantly, which to leave out. I don't see the need for running, jumping etc, seperately or all together under one skill unless they deplete Stamina and you have an actual Stamina bar that runs out, probably at slower/faster speeds depending on what you're doing.

    It all comes down to the level of realism you want.
    I think such skills are nice to have.

    Jumping is good for something like a thief who needs to scale walls or jump over large gaps.

    Being able to run faster gives an advantage to those who want to do something in game that is more athletically inclined.

    It clearly differentiates people in game and what they do.
  • HysasHysas Member UncommonPosts: 2
    Axehilt said:

    JDis25 said:
    I think a skill system such as Morrowind is my preferred style. Skills that you level by actually performing actions, and traits that you can choose to deposit points into upon increasing player level.  These traits govern certain skills (ex: Intelligence would govern magic skills, Personality governs Mercantile).

    But this system works best without auto-scaling levels like Skyrim or Fallout 3/4
    So did you think Darkfall at launch was the bee's knees?

    Or would you admit that scripting your character to auto-run in place while you slept was maybe not the most interesting design for a game?
    That is a weakness in the game. A game with a skill system that perfectly reflects what a person did to get as good as one is in something is the best in my opinion.
  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    Axehilt said:

    But if you're not going to run, then why do you care if you improve your running skill? If you don't use a sword, why would you care about improving your sword skill? Or, on the flipside, if I need strength for the type of character I'm playing, why wouldn't any of my actions be using strength anyway?

    A true use-based system promotes realism and helps players build up the play style that they're actually using.
    That's silly.  Everyone needs to run sometimes.  It's purely a matter of whether or not the game requires you to engage with a shallow activity (for potentially a very long time) to run well.

    It's the typical "game depth vs. realism" argument.  Most players want their skill to be challenged by a game, while others want shallow, repetitive realism.
    I think perhaps weapon skills would be something separate from the other skills.  Maybe there would be skills tied to the actual actual characters attributes and some skills that are an extension of how good they are at either using a weapon or using a tool of any kind.
Sign In or Register to comment.