Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Is this a possible solution that would satisfy both casual and hardcore gamers?
Zindaihas
Member UncommonPosts: 3,662
I just came up with this today while talking with a co-worker about gaming. As we all know, there is a dilemma that devs face about how challenging to make an MMO. There is a casual crowd out there that has a limited amount of time each week to devote to playing. Despite this, they want to be able to advance and enjoy all the aspects that the game has to offer. I can certainly understand this. On the other hand, there are those (and I would probably qualify for this group) who feel that if they're going to take the time to play, they might as well be pushed to the limits. Make advancement tough, make acquiring gear a real challenge, etc. it's tough to do both in one game.
How about this? This may not be a new idea, but I have never heard it before and neither had my co-worker. Allow for two different advancement trees within the same game. Make a tougher one that takes longer to complete and a shorter one that is a little easier. Once you decide to pursue one, that's the tree you lock yourself into for the remainder of that character.
Quick example. Let's suppose it takes ten thousand experience points to advance your character to the 2nd level. And let's say this is the tougher of the two trees. So when your character gained, say, 7500 xp pts, he would be given option to choose the easier of the two advancement trees. And if so, he would then become a lvl two character upon reaching 7500 xp pts. From then on, he would be locked into the easier of the two trees and each successive level would require about the same percentage of xp pts to advance as the tougher route.
But there would be a trade off to choosing this route. 75% off the xp pts to advance would mean gaining 75% of the benefits. Instead of your hit points increasing by 20, they would increase by 15. Your damage output would increase by about 75% of the tougher route, etc.
My friend saw some problems with this idea. The first was that the casuals would be complaining about better stats that the tougher route offers. But, imo, they would have no right to complain. They could still choose the tougher tree if they wanted and get the same benefits, it would just take them longer to advance. So I knocked objection out of the water.
But he did have an objection that makes a little more sense. Mob comparison. A level 10 character who went the easier route, seemingly, would not be able to face the same mobs as a level 10 character who chose the tougher route. Maybe, maybe not. There may be a way to compensate for this, not sure yet.
And of course, PvP would be skewed as well. But hey, we know that higher lvl characters gank lowbies in PvP all the time, so would this be totally unfair?
Finally, I would like to close by saying that I would probably not use this formula if I made a game because my game would be a skill-based advancement game, not a level-based one. I merely offer it as a possible solution to existing games which are overwhelmingly level-based.
Comments
In a more skill-based system, this wouldn't be an issue. Simply, you'd get the rewards you put in. None of this, "Nothing until your magic ding!" crap of current games, but tons of tiny rewards all along the way.
A much better option would be to take WoW's rested EXP system, but take it a step further.
For those not familiar with Wow's rested exp system, every 8 hours you spend offline grants a 200% exp modifier for 5% of your level, up to 1.5 levels. So after being offline for 10 days, a player will earn exp at 200% for up to 1.5 levels. For hardcore players, this means they level up slight faster when they start off, but get out of the rested system and level up normally. For semi-hardcore players, they break out of this rested area after a while, but spend the majority of their time in it. For casual players, they never leave rested status, which means they only get to level at about an extra 20% over a semi-hardcore player. Which is rather lame.
To take this a step further, after the 10 days, the bar starts transforming into 300% exp rate. After 5 more days, the bar starts transforming into 400% exp rate. After 3 more days, the bar starts transforming into 500% exp rate, and so on (note, the amount of rested experience being earned is constant, it's just that at 300%, the 1.5 level limit is reached much sooner). In this way, a player will settle in at some experience bonus relative to their amount of play style that helps ease them along. They still have to earn some experience, but it's easier for those that don't have a lot of time to play.
I actually proposed this idea a year or two ago on WoW's forums, but was shot down by the community for "wanting it easy". I never got past level 25 in the game, because even WoW felt grindy. It just had quests to hide it. Using this system, someone would get a 3000% exp boost after being inactive for a whole month, but it would only be good for 1.5 levels. But that's a month of inactivity. Another way to put it is that every 10 days gets 0.75x worth a level of rested bonus, so a person could hit level 70 almost exclusively off of rested XP (plus the occasional kill to cash it in) in 22 months of play. Is it not fair to give a player a level 70 character after 2 years of play?
I have a better idea yet.
Lets just get back to the days where games were made for a certain part of the community. Not every game had to accomidate every type of player.
There is no reason, other then Developer Greed (and it is greed because they would make plenty of money doing it this way), that we cant have games that center on PVP, Linear PVE quest driven, non linear, non quest based PVE (EQ style), open sandbox, and so on.
All the asshats who come onto a thread and say that a game should not get made because They would not play it are another reason why we have the same game getting made again and again with a slightly different wrapper.
Diversity is good my friends, Diversity is good.
I think the main problem in "Hardcore vs Casuals" is not the levelling up process at all. Most modern MMorpg do a good work here by offering relativly fast levelling up and short chunks of game you can play even in half an hour.
The real problem comes at end game on what kind of stuff you offer your clients. If it is only Raids that requires several tens of people, you can be sure very few casuals will ever get into that.
On the other hand it is only fairly easy group or solo content, then the hardcore will not be challenged enough and leave. Finding a balance to these two groups is quite complicated.
"If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime"
Ok before i start i been tossing back shots soo... enjoy a drunk rant.
Damn right. Take UO for example.. a badass game for pvp. Then people started bitching.. "boo hoo I dont want to get PKed, boo hoo I want more houses so I can horde more meaningless shit, blah blah blah!" So they introduced fel and tram.. from there on the game just went to shit imo. What the hell... in a game like UO where its built on pvp why would someone want to just pve? thats what EQ was for :P
i mean really what was it that made people cry about thier miners getting robbed? it was a SKILL based game.. not like a 50+ higher level than you could come in and one hit kill you. PK's tried to gank my miner all the time.. know what i did? i ganked them back. Id carry a DP* hally with me. as soon as i saw a red comming at me id pull it out. an being a miner with max str not to mention the DP* id generaly drop the PKer. When i couldent do that anymore i switched to magery. hmm here comes a red.. Vas flam! lol well what ever, point is it was a pvp game and i faught back. sometimes i died but most of the time i didnt cuz i didnt puss out in a pvp game. people that would see a PKer an get all scared and try to run or cry about it (i think sometimes even in real life lol) are retarded when they could just fight back. but no they had to make it carebearish like EQ an add tram. when there was already a great place to pve an never get killed by a player.. umm it was EQ:P and yeah i played EQ also.. sure it was great (cept for all the BS they fed us about class balance an 100 other things) but it is what it is, pve.
now i never played SWG but from what i hear it was a awesome game then they botched it with an expantion. so i feel for those SWG players that lost out on what was a good game cuz of it. most games seem to do this.. "ooo look that game is making money so we need to do what they are doing!" an they fuck it. look i know it is a buisness and they want to make money but.. IF ITS NOT BROKE, DONT FIX IT! if they just HAD to do something stupid they could have atleast made a seperate server for it an not screwed the whole game. its not all the dev's fault tho. alot of it has to do with asshat players. i hear this alot about new games "make this like it is in WoW! i hope they adopt the WoW aproch to this game! blah blah blah!" well... if WoW is soooo good then umm.. just play WoW!! ok i think im done.. i kinda forgot what i was ranting about in the 1st place lol i blame whiskey for this.. BUT IF ANYONE TRYS TO CHANGE MY WHISKY LIKE THEY DO MY GAMES I WILL SUICIDE BOMB THE BASTARDS! -grin-
* Deadly Posion (used to be able to apply to a halberd)
The major part of this argument that people seem to miss is that time invested does not equal difficulty. Whether a hardcore player reaching level cap in a week or a casual player reaching level cap in a month, the difficulty is the same, it's just a matter of real life time. Look at actual time played and the difference at level cap isn't any different between hardcore and casual players, the difference lies in the skill or play style of the individual player.
The only way to adjust the difficulty of a game is to adjust the AI or the death penalty.
If people can mindlessly throw themselves at a mob until they kill it with a minimal penalty for death, people may feel their's no real challenge. The game would then be considered too easy. (WoW)
However if the death penalty is so severe as to destroy several hours of gameplay for a hardcore player or destroy a complete days worth of advancement for a casual player, the game may be considered too hard. (EQ)
I feel the happy medium here would be to increase one while decreasing the other.
If mobs and quests are more difficult, players shouldn't have to spend hours making up for a mistake. Or, if mobs and quests are easy, people should spend a significant time making up for their mistakes. Both of these will require the player to develop a certain amount of skill to properly advance.
Another good blend of the player base would be to adjust the difficulty of mobs and quests for the different types of players. Make elite dungeons for groups who enjoy the dungeon crawl and large areas of elite mobs for groups who enjoy the grind. Also, create solo dungeons and grinding areas for those who don't have the time to group or prefer to solo. The big thing here would be to adjust experience gains based on mob difficulty and adjust loot drop percentages based on group size. Properly adjusted, groups targeting solo areas would see no benefit over completing objectives designed for groups.
A happy medium can be reached, it's simply a matter of tweaking a proper balance.
Powa gamer says, "Sweet, I level my character to pl my real character to max level really quick. Then I pl my main character to max level using my real max level character that is 75% effective and don't have to do it the hard way and by the time I get there I'll have plenty of money to equip him adequately to get started."
Not to mention the complaint casual gamers have is not that the game is to hard, its that they can't get the top end stuff without investing 8 hours a day to raiding with mandatory raids. Gimping your character to 75% effectiveness would be the worst choice possible for your main character and it would exclude you from ever doing anything high end. That particular method is so broken from so many possible ways that I can't imagine anyone who wasn't an absolute mmo noob taking that route and even if they were an absolute noob they'd be pretty damn pissed to find out they had *completely* gimped their character.
A better, more elegant, simple solution is-- Skill-based games instead of level-based. Done.
Shadus
What still amazes me is that none of the major MMO companies have realized this yet.
I agree that its the end game that players are complaining about. Everyone wana see the same content, even though they are casual or solo. that is why even now WoW have ditch the 40-man raid thing and convert to wing and 5/0 man instances, to make it more accessible for more people.
Maybe the dev could come out with another server? 1 for so-call hardcore and the other 1 for the rest? But make it non- transferable..... just a thought.
BTW: All of the company that makes game wana earn as much money as possible, this is call business. I wouldn't blame them. But how to do that? they must think out of the box. if they keep clinging on to the same formula as the others they will fail very soon.
So i said to all mmo'ers, no worries. those copy cats will not last long..... But how to cater to all, that's the question. And i believe that 1 day, it can be done.
RIP Orc Choppa
You think raiding is the divide between hardcore and casual? What about the players that never get to raiding level?
The OP's idea would be absolutely useless. Not one single person would take the <fast leveling, weaker character> option. Unless, as someone else suggested, hardcore power gamers used it as a way to quickly level up their first character so they could use that one to power level their "real" character.
I doubt if most casual players are terribly concerned about hitting max level in a week or whatever the point of this idea is supposed to be. The problem, as others have already pointed out, is that after they do reach max level (however long that might take) they find that their ability to progress AT ALL has ended if the only way to progress is through time-intensive raiding. Because it's not just the total time required, it's the fact that the time has to be invested in large, consecutive chunks and on a frequent basis and according to a schedule that other people lay out. So they can't just plug along at their own pace anymore and that makes it almost impossible for the time-constrained player to accomplish anything.
And then there are other people who could make the time for raiding but simply don't like it. I'm in that camp. I could make the time for it but I dislike it so much that I would honestly rather do almost anything else with my free time than to sit through boring ass raids. I can say, with all honesty, that I would rather sit in my yard watching the grass grow than sit through a raid for the umpteenth time.
I agree with the guy (Safwyd?) who said that developers shouldn't try to please everyone in the same game. Seriously, they need to just stop trying to do that. They should make games for raiders, that are insanely raid intensive from day one. Games in which you can't even gain levels without raiding. 100 person raids that take 15 hours to complete and have to be repeated 20 times just to get one item to drop, or whatever it is the raiders want.
But then they also should make games that have no raiding at all. Just soloing and small grouping all the way to the top and then end-game progression CONTINUES with solo and small group content.
What I am doing in my game is different. It allows people to race to the end and it allows people to take a slow trip. There are even options to start off at a university and take it very slow. The differences end up being differences in power, efficiency and rank.
Character who race to the end, will out rank their slower peers and will have a higher rank gaining efficiency. Those who take a slower route will be less efficient at gaining rank, but will have more power per rank. The slowest route will be the least efficient at gaining rank but will be the most effiicient at gaining power per rank.
I would be happy with small group like 5 man or solo versions of the raid dungeons like in Wow. I am fine with the loot being reduced just would like to see the game I am paying for. I get maybe 10 hours a week to game between the kids, job, school and all my community projects. That and since my days in EQ I have yet to meet a group a raiders worth talking to outside of one guild I met on the Argent Dawn sever in Wow
A single game can cater to both. But a single solution cannot. They are different groups with different interests and are thus best served with different solutions.
Anyway, my solution to this problem would be an MMO with zero progression or lateral progression. In these systems there wouldnt be a huge difference (stat wise) between a new avatar and an experienced one.
I don't think you really see the point to casual and hardcore gaming.Hardcore is nothing more than players who have all day and night to hangout in a game,therefore never have any restrictions to play.
Casual gamers don't want anything to be easier,they just want ot be able to logon and actually do something right away.By this i mean they don't want to join mr.hardcore and sit in a game waiting 1/2 maybe 3 hours to get invited into a party.They don't want to have to wait around for an alliance to form of 12/16/20 players before they can do some of the games elite content.Nope they just want to play a game that has the brains to allow all players to enjoy the game the same way without ending the rest of your life to do it.It's not about how many XP points you get or don't get,because that would lean towards superficial gaming,meaning your just playing to see your level number rise[pathetic reason for playing an MMO IMO].
To this day there is ONE and ONLY one game that has tried to conquer alot of setbacks>>>>EQ2.They tried a mentoring system wich allows any level to party with any other level.They have instances that allow you to choose how hard or solo or group.The EQ2 game has mobs out in the world that are in solos or multiples of 3/5 whatever.If just gives choice so that your not restricted to one form of play and ONLY one form will suffice.EQ2 has done many other things ,that other games do not,however i wouldn't say they have reached the pinnacle of appeasing casual and mr hardcore alike.
I played a F2P game called silkroad online that deff made it easy for harcore or casual,but most of these game designs make it a race to max out level so you can own the server...that is not the way to appease casual by making a brutal game design.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
i never got why casual player think they should get the same rewards as someone else who put in a lot of time and dedication, but for much less time/work.
Being able to dedicate more time to a game doesn't make anyone hardcore. It just means they can afford to spend that much more time chained to their computer than someone else. Or they're just hopelessly addicted.
MMO's are games, not second jobs. And I'd wager that most players now don't want their MMO's to become second jobs, either. They want to be able to play for a few hours at a time and still advance. And they want to be able to get decent gear to help them along. Not everyone has to have the top end stuff in a game.
Personally, I don't care if some shut-in with no life gets better gear than me because he spends 12+ hours a day grinding in a game. As long as I can get decent enough gear that allows me to advance at my own pace, I'm good.
What still amazes me is that none of the major MMO companies have realized this yet.
the same as you considered... for a game ,i will care more about its skill system instead of lvl's reflection..other side...there is a best players instead of a best game...
You idea's OP are not that bad, but what i do not like to see in this time and age is skill-based games, that boat has sailed aand isn't possible anymore, we have hte proof of all the skillbased games that didn't do well in the long run, why? simple cause people don't want to use skills all they want now is that UBER template they will be able to find on some internet page.
Sure skillbased worked when internet wasn't as mainstream it is today. Afcourse there is still a group of people that do enjoy skill-based and do not pursuit that UBER template, but from all my gaming experaince it's only the niche who will go for the true fun in mmorpg, the masses simply have proven not to enjoy uniqueness within this genre.
What truly would be a solution is that people start to except that not everyone play's the same or enjoy's the same aspects of this genre. Also many people need to stop trying to play this genre as if it's a job, i mean when i read certain complaints some people have on forums like this it looks as if those people are talking about a job instead of entertainment, when people finaly realize that games are a form of entertainment/hobby we will see allot more fun in this genre, but aslong people pretend a games is a valueble as a job we will continue to see misguided people in this genre.
And yes i said we ALL should except each persons playstyle but then it should be a playstyle and not look as if someone tries to make it a job.
Also jalouzy is something very nasty i keep witnessing within this genre and on forums like this (nothing to do with OP) just a common remark towards many posters on forums like this.
Soloers, and there's also quite a number of them.
RIP Orc Choppa
Soloers, and there's also quite a number of them.
Hey, I don't mind group content at all. But to be fair there's not a whole lot to do at low levels. In WoW, I did the low level instance twice, and then was ready to move on. But my only options were: Grind more (in the guise of quests), or run the instance over again until I can do the next one, which wasn't any more fun. I got into a couple of groups to do the leveling up part, but they were often short lived and only lasted as long as we had a common goal, "o i did that qust alrdy, bye".
So I never even got anywhere near the high level content. I really wanted to do Alterac Valley, but that part of the game isn't available to new players. So yeah, there's players that want to play these kinds of games, but don't want to invest 300 hours just to get to the fun stuff.
I don't like this idea mainly for the fact that a hardcore gamer can turn casual and a casual gamer can turn hardcore within the same game. Say, when you start playing a game you don't have alot of time to play it, but then a month later you do, so you want it to be more challenging .. but you can't because you are " locked in ." Then say a hardcore gamer decides they don't have that much time to spend on games so they reduce their playing time but want to keep up with their friends.. but they can't because they are " locked in ." I have a better idea.. have many different activities that appeal to many differnt types of players and zones for everything so that all types of players have something they consider fun to do in the same game. Making the game that appeals to everyone. It would make for a more diverse community, and more profits for the developers. The idea of zones for all kinds of activities allows for people with common interests to find each other within the game easier while doing things they enjoy. The idea of zones is more universal player friendly as long as there is enough variety in the zones that they offer something for everyone.
Casual gamers want to make progress in an hour's time of play.
Hardcore gamers want freedom.
All games, I believe, (and whether they realize it or not) want consequences for their in-game mistakes (i.e., a death penalty that stings just at least just a little.) You must have a death penalty or all fights become mundane and all rewards feel less meaningful. Risk and Reward go together; one without the other is not good.
Solution:
1) Racial starting areas, meaning NO stupid in-game tutorial. Tooltips suffice to show someone how to move or attack. If population shrinks over time, don't consolidate the noob area into an artificial tutorial, rather merge a server if necessary.
2) Few and meaningful quests. Quests should be additional fun and challenging activities, not a trivial grind and the main focus of the game.
3) Bring back the experience grind, but make it as fast as games that are quest grinds. With the threat of the sting of death, players will always be somewhat alert and excited with each challenging fight. Plus, as they group and rely upon one another, this will build the in-game community.
4) In most cases, monsters should be as tough as they look. A dinosaur should be tougher than a deer. (None of this WOW-type stuff of having a 16th level dinosaur in the same zone as a 17th level ostrich. C'mon).
5) Dungeons should be for the hardcore; those who want to group and take a couple or more hours to play.
6) Instancing should be limited.
7) Any mechanic to ease play should be weighed carefully before introduction. While players may complain that it takes time to traverse the Plans of Such-and-such, they will probably be happier than if instant teleports are placed around for no sensible reason. Dangerous travel is part of the adventure.
8) Backstory is okay in a game, and important to explain the NPC and city structure of the world, but players should never be forced down some scripted story arc. The characters are not in a "story", they are in a "world." For example, it is much more fun to freely wander Middle Earth (at your own peril) than to have some artifical constraint saying, "You can't go to the Mirkwood yet, because you haven't completed Chapter 4 and you're still in Chapter 2.
9) Definition: TRAINS. The foolish mistakes of other players should have some possible impact on their peers. For example, if a group of noobs pulls too many monsters and they start to run your way, there should be a possibility of some of the monsters aggroing on your group. After all, if you share the world you share the risks.
10) Death penalty that stings (as previously mentioned).
11) Wandering mobs, and maybe at least one overly-tough mob per zone or area, to keep folks on their toes as they grind. Ex.: That giant werewolf in DAOC, Thid-side, or the werewolf or griffin in EQ's Karanas and Commonlands, respectively.
Of course, there are many other ingredients that can go into a great MMORPG, but they all should be sensible, serious (mostly), and appropriate to the game setting.
Just my two coppers on the topic.
McDonald's has no meal for $25 with a waiter and wine, Ford designs most of its cars for the working class(I know they have 1 or 2 exotic cars, but that doesn't keep them in business), Mercedes isn't concerned if the blue collar workers will never ride in one let alone own one, that fancy pizza joint down the road doesn't care if you're not interested in buying a pizza for $25.
Somehow all these guys are in business, and make money even though they cater to a select taste, and or lifestyle. Why can MMO devs not do this? Every game tries to cater to every style. IMO, if they just stuck to one philosophy we'd have a much better selection.
I agree, but I do think they are ignoring some player niches. Just like most movies focus on the 16 to 25 year old male crowd (biggest movie-going group) and mostly ignore older folks and other groups.