I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
I am not directly against the idea, and this is not political, but it's similar to the idea of Socialism. before you tell me how great it is, can you show me one successful example of it working? Kinda like full Loot Open World PvP games. Players swear this is the best idea ever, and the only reason why it is not the mega seller is because everyone does it wrong.
Ok.. look.. if several people tried this idea, and it failed miserably or failed apathetically or even joyously, I am not picky on the emotionally of it.. the point is, they failed. Which means either:
A) the idea is a bad idea, even if it looks good on paper, or some idea you are passionate about, in the end, it does not work in execution.
We need to wait for the Leonardo DaVincis of Game developer teams to pull this off just right.
I think what happens however, really is that the idea seems to look good on a micro scale, or installed in limited manners in games, as almost all games have some kind of horizontal progression systems in them, often side systems, and flavor things. This gives players the illusion this can be a stand alone idea, when it can't. It works in the system it is in, because it is supported by the other systems around it Ergo, the other vertical progress systems allow for some horizontal systems to exist and fit nicely.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
Aren't levels "intrinsic" to RPGs, though? If so, an MMORPG by it's very nature needs levels.
By the way, any number after anything (class, skills, abilities) are levels, ie: a way to measure growth.
No, levels are not intrinsic to RPGs.
The only thing needed for roleplaying games is......role playing. Levels very rarely have anything to do with roleplaying.
There do exist roleplaying games without levels, they are just rare. Sadly, Dungeons and Dragons set the mould, so the geeks who grew up playing D&D are the same geeks who went on to create the first computer RPGs, borrowing/stealing from what they were already familiar with. It's become a self-perpetuating feature - we have levels because we had levels.
Levels are intrinsic to the "G" in RPG. Never forget that this is a game, not a simple exercise in... whatever.
No, they are not intrinsic to anything except D&D's offspring. A game can be fun without any progression, see "Counterstrike"(some unknown game, pffft). Sure CS is another type of game, but would a (d&d) module that started you at 20 and focused completely on fair and balanced encounters be bad?
Agreed. All some people know is D&D > AD&D > DIKU > EQ > WOW so they assume that's how it has to work.
Traveller is an RPG system that has no levels. It was first released in the 1980's and is long established. The rulesets for Traveller are much deeper than TSR's D&D, but have no levels. Progression is based on skills and the experiences player characters undergo on their adventures. In the original ruleset skill advancement was slow and rare. Characters never directly got increased "hit points" or "ThAC0" except through mutations or some random adventure events. It was based much more on a more pure interpretation of science fiction along the lines of Arthur C. Clarke and Larry Niven rather than the "Buck Rogers" style of D&D.
How progression is defined in RPGs is completely contextual to the system itself.
It seems like somewhere along the line EQ players decided they owned "RPG" design along with MMORPG despite their being strong examples of designs outside theirs like Ultima Online.
Even some systems with "levels" only use them as monikers to designate skill progress or a collection of points to assign.
I get the desire for classically designed games, but any one implementation trying to own such a broad system won't give the desired result. It's like trying to box up creativity. It just doesn't work.
You know... Bringing up Traveller (sic) is a great point. Champions also had no levels. Your XP bought new powers or bought off disadvantages taken during character creation.
However, I use caution in wanting "level-less design." Progress is intrinsic to RPGs for me. You must be able to improve your characters. Horizontal progress is not as noticeable as vertical progress, thus tougher to imagine for me.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
No, they are not intrinsic to anything except D&D's offspring. A game can be fun without any progression, see "Counterstrike"(some unknown game, pffft). Sure CS is another type of game, but would a (d&d) module that started you at 20 and focused completely on fair and balanced encounters be bad?
Agreed. All some people know is D&D > AD&D > DIKU > EQ > WOW so they assume that's how it has to work.
Traveller is an RPG system that has no levels. It was first released in the 1980's and is long established. The rulesets for Traveller are much deeper than TSR's D&D, but have no levels. Progression is based on skills and the experiences player characters undergo on their adventures. In the original ruleset skill advancement was slow and rare. Characters never directly got increased "hit points" or "ThAC0" except through mutations or some random adventure events. It was based much more on a more pure interpretation of science fiction along the lines of Arthur C. Clarke and Larry Niven rather than the "Buck Rogers" style of D&D.
How progression is defined in RPGs is completely contextual to the system itself.
It seems like somewhere along the line EQ players decided they owned "RPG" design along with MMORPG despite their being strong examples of designs outside theirs like Ultima Online.
Even some systems with "levels" only use them as monikers to designate skill progress or a collection of points to assign.
I get the desire for classically designed games, but any one implementation trying to own such a broad system won't give the desired result. It's like trying to box up creativity. It just doesn't work.
Just to mention something.
There are hundreds of game systems out there, I Learned that there are a lot systems when I started to do Miniature Battles, more systems than I could name. Some rose to prominence, like AD&D, and GURPS, some far less, but still well known like GamaWorld for example, and then there were the game systems that were in the bargain bin and still not sold. Much like when Collectable Trading Card Games started, there were tons of them, but still games like Magic the Gathering, Pokemon, and YugiOh, rose to fame, and pretty much everything else, sunk to the bottom. No doubt some of the bottom sinkers had great ideas, and I wager even some had a small cult like following, that adored them. This in no way made them even remotely successful, and when it comes to things that survive, grow, and move forward, being at least somewhat successful is a requirement.
Now I used to attend Gaming Cons way back in the 90's, when I had freetime and a disposable income, I have never heard of anyone talk about Traveller as a game system.
Which might be why.. no one looked at it and said "This is gonna make money!".. because it didn't make the people that first made it... money.
Just saying, when you talk about pitching how great an idea is, showing a successful example is really the keystone start to making your point.
If you can't at least point out something that was at least somewhat competitive in success to other systems, that should be your warning sign that this is not a good system.
Like to use an example, One would have thought that Iso Camera angle MMO style games would have died a long time ago, but because games like UO, which was a huge success for its era, these games keep getting made, even tho in the major MMO market it is Virtual World 3D with overhead 3d or 1st person that denominate. That Iso world still hangs on due to players and developers being able to look at UO and say.. "It works"
So when you pitch your idea.. can you find a single game that was comparatively successful and say "Look, it works"
If not, well, maybe the idea is really just bad.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Aren't levels "intrinsic" to RPGs, though? If so, an MMORPG by it's very nature needs levels.
By the way, any number after anything (class, skills, abilities) are levels, ie: a way to measure growth.
No, levels are not intrinsic to RPGs.
The only thing needed for roleplaying games is......role playing. Levels very rarely have anything to do with roleplaying.
There do exist roleplaying games without levels, they are just rare. Sadly, Dungeons and Dragons set the mould, so the geeks who grew up playing D&D are the same geeks who went on to create the first computer RPGs, borrowing/stealing from what they were already familiar with. It's become a self-perpetuating feature - we have levels because we had levels.
Levels are intrinsic to the "G" in RPG. Never forget that this is a game, not a simple exercise in... whatever.
No, they are not intrinsic to anything except D&D's offspring. A game can be fun without any progression, see "Counterstrike"(some unknown game, pffft). Sure CS is another type of game, but would a (d&d) module that started you at 20 and focused completely on fair and balanced encounters be bad?
Agreed. All some people know is D&D > AD&D > DIKU > EQ > WOW so they assume that's how it has to work.
Traveller is an RPG system that has no levels. It was first released in the 1980's and is long established. The rulesets for Traveller are much deeper than TSR's D&D, but have no levels. Progression is based on skills and the experiences player characters undergo on their adventures. In the original ruleset skill advancement was slow and rare. Characters never directly got increased "hit points" or "ThAC0" except through mutations or some random adventure events. It was based much more on a more pure interpretation of science fiction along the lines of Arthur C. Clarke and Larry Niven rather than the "Buck Rogers" style of D&D.
How progression is defined in RPGs is completely contextual to the system itself.
It seems like somewhere along the line EQ players decided they owned "RPG" design along with MMORPG despite their being strong examples of designs outside theirs like Ultima Online.
Even some systems with "levels" only use them as monikers to designate skill progress or a collection of points to assign.
I get the desire for classically designed games, but any one implementation trying to own such a broad system won't give the desired result. It's like trying to box up creativity. It just doesn't work.
You know... Bringing up Traveller (sic) is a great point. Champions also had no levels. Your XP bought new powers or bought off disadvantages taken during character creation.
However, I use caution in wanting "level-less design." Progress is intrinsic to RPGs for me. You must be able to improve your characters. Horizontal progress is not as noticeable as vertical progress, thus tougher to imagine for me.
I totally forgot about Champions. Great example.
For mass consumption there is a reason DIKU ended up being the template instead of games like UO or Asheron's Call. Most people do like a marked progression administered in measured recognizable increments. But I also feel that's different than saying DIKU leveling is the only way to do it or is absolutely necessary for a game or MMO to be developed that way.
WoW became king in a part due to marketing, but mostly because it refined DIKU/D&D leveling in a most palatable form. Contrast that to UO which has stagnated over the last 20 years or so. Or with Asheron's Call and SWG which have never seen a truly worthy sequel (and Project Gorgon doesn't count at all imo). Those games don't draw in the crowds that spark MMO success.
So, while I don't believe classic character leveling is intrinsic to MMORPGs, it is probably the most suitable approach, especially for mass appeal. Mass appeal is really important if you want the Massively Multiplayer part to be successful.
What I personally think is best for MMORPG health as a genre is to have quality mainstream games in the format you describe with a couple outliers in the form of UO, AC, SWG, and the like for some diversity.
I want that too, but the problem being, it's never going to happen. Dude, we're never going to get what we want and that's the sad reality of it. That's why I've stopped looking for MMOs proper and just want a decent MMO-alike and those are rare as all get out. I find it truly discouraging that what we have are a bunch of ancient "undead" games limping along in a pathetic half-living half-dead state. Their shitty "successors" are just salt in the would adding insult to injury. Sorry to be so negative but that is just how I feel about the situation. It's basically hopeless.
I think EQ was 3d and had better/more familiar lore to the type of players playing the genre.
WoW had a lot going for it. It appealed to an already online fanatic fan base, DnD players, high speed net becoming available, probably the best playability of all time in the genre which was leagues beyond EQ or any other game, works good on most computers, good marketing.
SWG was clunky and unplayable on a lot of computers. Combat wasn't that great and etc. Not much money has been put into this type of virtual world type game.
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
Answer is simple, games should let you grind to a level where you get a skill for GM status on you character for 60 secs 1 per week... people would never log off to get to that level.
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
My point is that single player RPG methods work in MMORPG. Progression like Legend of Zelda can be done in MMORPG. You can easily ramp up most means of progression to be in groups or in isolation. As group or single player style has been done under the same method in WoW. Level scalling emulates levelless progression and has been done in even WoW.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end "
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
Aren't levels "intrinsic" to RPGs, though? If so, an MMORPG by it's very nature needs levels.
By the way, any number after anything (class, skills, abilities) are levels, ie: a way to measure growth.
No, levels are not intrinsic to RPGs.
The only thing needed for roleplaying games is......role playing. Levels very rarely have anything to do with roleplaying.
There do exist roleplaying games without levels, they are just rare. Sadly, Dungeons and Dragons set the mould, so the geeks who grew up playing D&D are the same geeks who went on to create the first computer RPGs, borrowing/stealing from what they were already familiar with. It's become a self-perpetuating feature - we have levels because we had levels.
Levels are intrinsic to the "G" in RPG. Never forget that this is a game, not a simple exercise in... whatever.
No, they are not intrinsic to anything except D&D's offspring. A game can be fun without any progression, see "Counterstrike"(some unknown game, pffft). Sure CS is another type of game, but would a (d&d) module that started you at 20 and focused completely on fair and balanced encounters be bad?
Agreed. All some people know is D&D > AD&D > DIKU > EQ > WOW so they assume that's how it has to work.
Traveller is an RPG system that has no levels. It was first released in the 1980's and is long established. The rulesets for Traveller are much deeper than TSR's D&D, but have no levels. Progression is based on skills and the experiences player characters undergo on their adventures. In the original ruleset skill advancement was slow and rare. Characters never directly got increased "hit points" or "ThAC0" except through mutations or some random adventure events. It was based much more on a more pure interpretation of science fiction along the lines of Arthur C. Clarke and Larry Niven rather than the "Buck Rogers" style of D&D.
How progression is defined in RPGs is completely contextual to the system itself.
It seems like somewhere along the line EQ players decided they owned "RPG" design along with MMORPG despite their being strong examples of designs outside theirs like Ultima Online.
Even some systems with "levels" only use them as monikers to designate skill progress or a collection of points to assign.
I get the desire for classically designed games, but any one implementation trying to own such a broad system won't give the desired result. It's like trying to box up creativity. It just doesn't work.
You know... Bringing up Traveller (sic) is a great point. Champions also had no levels. Your XP bought new powers or bought off disadvantages taken during character creation.
However, I use caution in wanting "level-less design." Progress is intrinsic to RPGs for me. You must be able to improve your characters. Horizontal progress is not as noticeable as vertical progress, thus tougher to imagine for me.
I totally forgot about Champions. Great example.
For mass consumption there is a reason DIKU ended up being the template instead of games like UO or Asheron's Call. Most people do like a marked progression administered in measured recognizable increments. But I also feel that's different than saying DIKU leveling is the only way to do it or is absolutely necessary for a game or MMO to be developed that way.
WoW became king in a part due to marketing, but mostly because it refined DIKU/D&D leveling in a most palatable form. Contrast that to UO which has stagnated over the last 20 years or so. Or with Asheron's Call and SWG which have never seen a truly worthy sequel (and Project Gorgon doesn't count at all imo). Those games don't draw in the crowds that spark MMO success.
So, while I don't believe classic character leveling is intrinsic to MMORPGs, it is probably the most suitable approach, especially for mass appeal. Mass appeal is really important if you want the Massively Multiplayer part to be successful.
What I personally think is best for MMORPG health as a genre is to have quality mainstream games in the format you describe with a couple outliers in the form of UO, AC, SWG, and the like for some diversity.
I want that too, but the problem being, it's never going to happen. Dude, we're never going to get what we want and that's the sad reality of it. That's why I've stopped looking for MMOs proper and just want a decent MMO-alike and those are rare as all get out. I find it truly discouraging that what we have are a bunch of ancient "undead" games limping along in a pathetic half-living half-dead state. Their shitty "successors" are just salt in the would adding insult to injury. Sorry to be so negative but that is just how I feel about the situation. It's basically hopeless.
Actually, I played a game like what you are talking about.
Where it had levels, but the levels did not give you direct power, they opened up access to wargear and abilities. The more you leveled up, the more diverse and in some cases powerful wargear you gained access to.
But your character, in and of themselves, still had the same base stats and the same loadout points, so you were not over powered no matter what the level disparity.
The key point here, is that it was a lobby shooter.. and a dumpster fire.
Now, given, the game failing had nothing to do with it's progress system, IMHO at least,. but, while I have seen this idea in action, and thought it was pretty well done, I don't have anything to say "Yah see it can work" because.. again.. that game was a dumpsterfire.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
My point is that single player RPG methods work in MMORPG. Progression like Legend of Zelda can be done in MMORPG. You can easily ramp up most means of progression to be in groups or in isolation. As group or single player style has been done under the same method in WoW. Level scalling emulates levelless progression and has been done in even WoW.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end "
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
LMFAO .. wow .. its still level based you do understand that dont you ?
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
My point is that single player RPG methods work in MMORPG. Progression like Legend of Zelda can be done in MMORPG. You can easily ramp up most means of progression to be in groups or in isolation. As group or single player style has been done under the same method in WoW. Level scalling emulates levelless progression and has been done in even WoW.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end "
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
LMFAO .. wow .. its still level based you do understand that dont you ?
So is Guildwars2 right? So what have I been doing for the last 8 years? What about between 2004 and 2007 in Vanilla WoW? What was I doing during that time as a level 60, if levels is the main way to progress in a MMORPG?
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
My point is that single player RPG methods work in MMORPG. Progression like Legend of Zelda can be done in MMORPG. You can easily ramp up most means of progression to be in groups or in isolation. As group or single player style has been done under the same method in WoW. Level scalling emulates levelless progression and has been done in even WoW.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end "
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
LMFAO .. wow .. its still level based you do understand that dont you ?
It's 1 to 1 progression. It emulates levelless progression.
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
My point is that single player RPG methods work in MMORPG. Progression like Legend of Zelda can be done in MMORPG. You can easily ramp up most means of progression to be in groups or in isolation. As group or single player style has been done under the same method in WoW. Level scalling emulates levelless progression and has been done in even WoW.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end "
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
LMFAO .. wow .. its still level based you do understand that dont you ?
So is Guildwars2 right? So what have I been doing for the last 8 years? What about between 2004 and 2007 in Vanilla WoW? What was I doing during that time as a level 60, if levels is the main way to progress in a MMORPG?
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
Was Champions that old pen and paper where you could create a superhero? I remember the energy assigning was cool. It was more broad in it's implementation and allowed you to create a hero exactly as you wanted without being locked into a certain build
Yes Champions was a "math heavy", very detailed RPG. You had to work with fractions! Characters were built with a point buy system and powers were basic (like 2d6 or 4d6) but the effects were flavor, like fire or ice or lightning.
You bought your powers (so many points per d6), then modified them by advantages or disadvantages (+1/2 or -1/4) to the cost. It even had a system that awarded good "themes" for characters: Multi-Power and Power Pools. It was a totally open-ended creation system that I loved
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
D&D has been mentioned many times here. What people forget is that D&D was a very simplified game.
A good fight would take anywhere from 30 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the rolls. Imagine what it would have been like had they used a more intricate combat system!
Hit Points was not health, in the early days. It was a "symbol" of how your character was getting better at fighting. To Hit AC0 (THAC0) was not any indication of your manual dexterity, it was a broad indicator of your more familiarization with the weapon(s) your character used. Your weapon made little difference if it was made of iron, steel, or butter. Your character never improved their starting stats, unless with magic.
These simplified systems did not translate well into video games. Hit Points became health. Armor class became actual armor. Developers tried to translate what they experienced in D&D and failed. They wanted levels. They wanted those levels to mean something. In addition to skills, spells, and abilities they started adding in Health and Ability increases. They started dividing up, specifying what D&D simplified.
I still like levels in my RPGs, but they are certainly not a necessity
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I will not sit on riverbank and fish , but i will sit on the riverbank to watch the fishs doing something funny .
Sometime You don't need progression , you just need to enjoy the world . Rushing to the end don't mean everything end here .
BTW , i hate to say this but your logic don't work with R18+ games .
Iike i alway said , what important is the reward that the game give you , not the middle progress .
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
My point is that single player RPG methods work in MMORPG. Progression like Legend of Zelda can be done in MMORPG. You can easily ramp up most means of progression to be in groups or in isolation. As group or single player style has been done under the same method in WoW. Level scalling emulates levelless progression and has been done in even WoW.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end "
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
LMFAO .. wow .. its still level based you do understand that dont you ?
So is Guildwars2 right? So what have I been doing for the last 8 years? What about between 2004 and 2007 in Vanilla WoW? What was I doing during that time as a level 60, if levels is the main way to progress in a MMORPG?
Wasting your time?
And I waste more time with level grind that don't even contribute to the real endgame which is where most of your gametime will take place
I guess a fundamental question is do you have a goal? If so, then you do things to progress to that goal. It's the same in any kind of game.
Take chess, for example. There is no role-playing, no levels, but there is a goal. You can measure your progression towards that goal. Actions can be rated in terms of how much they affect getting to the goal. You get a feeling of achievement at the end.
If there is no goal, then there is no achievement at the end. Humans don't do well in that kind of environment. Even in real life.
Let's say there is a single-player game where you start out with everything already accomplished. You have all items, buildings, farms, skills, etc, that you could ever get. Why would you play a game like that? Just to sit on a riverbank and fish?
I think goals can be had outside of combat. In modern MMORPG levels aren't even a real goal anymore. It's progression of gear and stats. Levels and leveling is trivial.
The problem is the only real goal is character progression and combat. Seems rather pedestrian for the scale of the genre.
I would like game play for explorers, crafters, community builders, combatants and achievers.
Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end
Levels of some sort? I think when people talk about levels they are talking about vertical progression with each level being drastic power platform. A level 100 wizard will be a level 75 fighter in melee type action. It is not necessary.
If your acquring different Levels/Tiers etc of Gear or Stats its the same thing ...
And you don't need that either honestly. Again, that is a combat focused outlook. Even this you could just be getting situational gear. The point of being levelless is to limit power creep vs. finding alternative means to push it.
Without.... Class/Skill/.Gear/Stat level progression or some combo of those you end up with Second Life .. Go give that a try ..
Also , how to kill a mob it has to have a lvl of HP/Skill etc .. there has to be a measurement of difficulty which = Levels
You just don't understand the concept. I feel like I have gone over this with you in the past. WoW without levels wouldn't become Second Life.
Difficulty is done the same way in games with levels. You have normal, hard and elite or whatever you want to measure it.
Again, it's about power creep not trying aha gotcha there are power levels period. It's about having 1 base power platform vs. 100 levels worth.
There is no functional concept
Have you ever played Legend of Zelda. Seems to be a functional concept going fine for decades.
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Breath of the Wild was released in 2017. The concept of progression without levels or power creep exist.
Again just a single player story driven game ..
We are discussing competitive MMORPGs
Single-player style of progression dominate MMORPG. Not sure what you are talking about.
The Irony of this statement that someone conciously typed this and does not see the problem .. And how it is part of the problem ..
My point is that single player RPG methods work in MMORPG. Progression like Legend of Zelda can be done in MMORPG. You can easily ramp up most means of progression to be in groups or in isolation. As group or single player style has been done under the same method in WoW. Level scalling emulates levelless progression and has been done in even WoW.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Same thing ... you cannot have a competetive MMORPG without levels of some sort /end "
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
LMFAO .. wow .. its still level based you do understand that dont you ?
So is Guildwars2 right? So what have I been doing for the last 8 years? What about between 2004 and 2007 in Vanilla WoW? What was I doing during that time as a level 60, if levels is the main way to progress in a MMORPG?
Wasting your time?
And I waste more time with level grind that don't even contribute to the real endgame which is where most of your gametime will take place
If the MMORPG you are playing has an end game that's your mistake right there.
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
D&D has been mentioned many times here. What people forget is that D&D was a very simplified game.
A good fight would take anywhere from 30 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the rolls. Imagine what it would have been like had they used a more intricate combat system!
Hit Points was not health, in the early days. It was a "symbol" of how your character was getting better at fighting. To Hit AC0 (THAC0) was not any indication of your manual dexterity, it was a broad indicator of your more familiarization with the weapon(s) your character used. Your weapon made little difference if it was made of iron, steel, or butter. Your character never improved their starting stats, unless with magic.
These simplified systems did not translate well into video games. Hit Points became health. Armor class became actual armor. Developers tried to translate what they experienced in D&D and failed. They wanted levels. They wanted those levels to mean something. In addition to skills, spells, and abilities they started adding in Health and Ability increases. They started dividing up, specifying what D&D simplified.
I still like levels in my RPGs, but they are certainly not a necessity
Did you and your friends ever use ICE's Rolemaster? Talk about complicated. We would pull ideas and rulesets from Rolemaster and merge them with our AD&D campaigns. Sometimes we did fast simplified D&D combat for insignificant encounters but major encounters we used the hybrid rules with armour and location hits. Good stuff!
I recall looking into/at Iron Crown Enterprise's Master series. I think there was Clawmaster, too for beasts. We may have played one session but not more. Did Iron Crown have anything to do with Middle Earth Roleplaying (MERP) System? For some reason I'm making this connection in my faulty memory
Yes, my group was rather dissatisfied with D&D combat. We tried many variations and "tweakings." We usually went back to "the simple life."
Thinking back, I spent 3 high school years and 3 full summers in roleplaying bliss, trying everything we could get our hands on Then we all went to different colleges...
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
D&D has been mentioned many times here. What people forget is that D&D was a very simplified game.
A good fight would take anywhere from 30 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the rolls. Imagine what it would have been like had they used a more intricate combat system!
Hit Points was not health, in the early days. It was a "symbol" of how your character was getting better at fighting. To Hit AC0 (THAC0) was not any indication of your manual dexterity, it was a broad indicator of your more familiarization with the weapon(s) your character used. Your weapon made little difference if it was made of iron, steel, or butter. Your character never improved their starting stats, unless with magic.
These simplified systems did not translate well into video games. Hit Points became health. Armor class became actual armor. Developers tried to translate what they experienced in D&D and failed. They wanted levels. They wanted those levels to mean something. In addition to skills, spells, and abilities they started adding in Health and Ability increases. They started dividing up, specifying what D&D simplified.
I still like levels in my RPGs, but they are certainly not a necessity
This is very accurate, and Gygax even talked about this in the Dungeon's Master Guide, where he explained that having more HP did not mean your character was inherently tougher, it was to indicate that they sidestepped the blow, or moved in such a way to make it a glancing blow as opposed to a direct hit like they would at the early levels. This is why a 1st level fighter had on average like 6 hp, and could be killed by a dagger, because they didn't know how to move or deflect the blows, and would take the dagger straight into them, and a 10th level fighter had around 60 hp, and would glance off blows all the time.
Now, again, AC was the same way, it was not a test of your armor directly, or even if you got hit, it was a question of if you could defect the blow, or dodge it, or the many various ways you can avoid taking the damage directly.
Now, MMO's could incorporate all these things into them. in fact, DDO, works in this direction with a lot of HomeBrew revisions to how things like AC and HP work, and this gives players a LOT to think about.
... yah.. giving players a LOT to think about is not always a good thing in an MMO where players want to just jump in and play.
I am not even going to get into what kind of shit show it would become if the game gave the illusion of something like horizontal level progression, but in reality was working on a gear/skill base, that would allow players to be exponential more powerful than other players, under the disguise of being the same "level"
In fact games like GW2 are crushing under this exact problem with their max level characters, so much so, that the Devs themselves have come out and even admitted the game suffers under disparity of meta builds and rotations being able to dish out 10X the damage of what would be an average build or even something simple less than optimal.
This making it exceedingly hard to design and judge encounters, and making any semblance of balance in their PvP a laughing stock.
Now ideally, the game could just work out all the numbers behind the scenes, but again, it would need to be some kind of system, as even in real, take someone who has been fencing for 20 years, while the chance might exist that the novice could beat them, the expected and often assured outcome is the more experienced fencer wins.
And this is something that MMO's need to address, and the answer is not simply the skill of the player themselves, as that eliminates any advantage of investing any real time into the game, and you might as well focus on making a lobby shooter.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Comments
we are discussing competeitve MMORPGs , not 30 year old single player snes games ..
Ok.. look.. if several people tried this idea, and it failed miserably or failed apathetically or even joyously, I am not picky on the emotionally of it.. the point is, they failed. Which means either:
A) the idea is a bad idea, even if it looks good on paper, or some idea you are passionate about, in the end, it does not work in execution.
I think what happens however, really is that the idea seems to look good on a micro scale, or installed in limited manners in games, as almost all games have some kind of horizontal progression systems in them, often side systems, and flavor things. This gives players the illusion this can be a stand alone idea, when it can't. It works in the system it is in, because it is supported by the other systems around it Ergo, the other vertical progress systems allow for some horizontal systems to exist and fit nicely.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
There are hundreds of game systems out there, I Learned that there are a lot systems when I started to do Miniature Battles, more systems than I could name. Some rose to prominence, like AD&D, and GURPS, some far less, but still well known like GamaWorld for example, and then there were the game systems that were in the bargain bin and still not sold. Much like when Collectable Trading Card Games started, there were tons of them, but still games like Magic the Gathering, Pokemon, and YugiOh, rose to fame, and pretty much everything else, sunk to the bottom. No doubt some of the bottom sinkers had great ideas, and I wager even some had a small cult like following, that adored them. This in no way made them even remotely successful, and when it comes to things that survive, grow, and move forward, being at least somewhat successful is a requirement.
Now I used to attend Gaming Cons way back in the 90's, when I had freetime and a disposable income, I have never heard of anyone talk about Traveller as a game system.
Which might be why.. no one looked at it and said "This is gonna make money!".. because it didn't make the people that first made it... money.
Just saying, when you talk about pitching how great an idea is, showing a successful example is really the keystone start to making your point.
If you can't at least point out something that was at least somewhat competitive in success to other systems, that should be your warning sign that this is not a good system.
Like to use an example, One would have thought that Iso Camera angle MMO style games would have died a long time ago, but because games like UO, which was a huge success for its era, these games keep getting made, even tho in the major MMO market it is Virtual World 3D with overhead 3d or 1st person that denominate. That Iso world still hangs on due to players and developers being able to look at UO and say.. "It works"
So when you pitch your idea.. can you find a single game that was comparatively successful and say "Look, it works"
If not, well, maybe the idea is really just bad.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
WoW had a lot going for it. It appealed to an already online fanatic fan base, DnD players, high speed net becoming available, probably the best playability of all time in the genre which was leagues beyond EQ or any other game, works good on most computers, good marketing.
SWG was clunky and unplayable on a lot of computers. Combat wasn't that great and etc. Not much money has been put into this type of virtual world type game.
I call it the Keanu level.
Bias, trolling, lack of imagination, understanding or combination is the only thing that makes this debatable on your end.
"Sooo......... Progressing Level of Gear and Stats ....
Even in your own words you seemed to understand that progression is is about numbers and how you apply it or not.
Where it had levels, but the levels did not give you direct power, they opened up access to wargear and abilities. The more you leveled up, the more diverse and in some cases powerful wargear you gained access to.
But your character, in and of themselves, still had the same base stats and the same loadout points, so you were not over powered no matter what the level disparity.
The key point here, is that it was a lobby shooter.. and a dumpster fire.
Now, given, the game failing had nothing to do with it's progress system, IMHO at least,. but, while I have seen this idea in action, and thought it was pretty well done, I don't have anything to say "Yah see it can work" because.. again.. that game was a dumpsterfire.
LMFAO .. wow .. its still level based you do understand that dont you ?
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
"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
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
"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
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Now, again, AC was the same way, it was not a test of your armor directly, or even if you got hit, it was a question of if you could defect the blow, or dodge it, or the many various ways you can avoid taking the damage directly.
Now, MMO's could incorporate all these things into them. in fact, DDO, works in this direction with a lot of HomeBrew revisions to how things like AC and HP work, and this gives players a LOT to think about.
... yah.. giving players a LOT to think about is not always a good thing in an MMO where players want to just jump in and play.
I am not even going to get into what kind of shit show it would become if the game gave the illusion of something like horizontal level progression, but in reality was working on a gear/skill base, that would allow players to be exponential more powerful than other players, under the disguise of being the same "level"
In fact games like GW2 are crushing under this exact problem with their max level characters, so much so, that the Devs themselves have come out and even admitted the game suffers under disparity of meta builds and rotations being able to dish out 10X the damage of what would be an average build or even something simple less than optimal.
This making it exceedingly hard to design and judge encounters, and making any semblance of balance in their PvP a laughing stock.
Now ideally, the game could just work out all the numbers behind the scenes, but again, it would need to be some kind of system, as even in real, take someone who has been fencing for 20 years, while the chance might exist that the novice could beat them, the expected and often assured outcome is the more experienced fencer wins.
And this is something that MMO's need to address, and the answer is not simply the skill of the player themselves, as that eliminates any advantage of investing any real time into the game, and you might as well focus on making a lobby shooter.