Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I am looking forward to a MMO with no levels.
shane910
Member Posts: 359
I have been unhappy with the direction I have seen MMO's heading for a while now. All seem to be a long grind of levels and doing meaningless and and boreing quests, for the same rewards of either pointless gear(soon to be outdated and unusable) or some type of consumable. They all seem to have a halfhearted attempt at PvP ... but only about 1/2 of the players ever get to experiance it cause of level constraints. Most people only get to about half LvL cap anymore ...me included now, before they get tired of the game and it's repetition throughout the LvL's.
I see alot of suggestions on improving MMO's by going back to skill based. I must admit I did enjoy the skill based games much better... but now it would not work out the way we would expect. The "industry" has the LvL mindset now. Instead of the skill based game we would think we were getting, and instead of one 1-80(cap?) grind, it will be levels x 20 or 30 or however many skills they have and extreme grinds for each. Not gonna work.
I am looking forward to a MMO with no levels.
I want a game where you make your character who he is and will be from the begining and you choose from a huge diverse list of skill and abilities that you can "hone" with a skill based system that gives only slight bonuses. One that would improve and degrade rather quickly depending upon use. Where their is no restriction on what you can wear based on a level. (why the hell cant we wear a cape till lvl 40? We dont have enough skill to tie a string arround our necks?) This way you can design the outfit you wish to wear and use it till you want to go for a different look or have different needs.
In PvP their would be the potential for truely mass PvP. For the simple fact that everyone can now compete or atleast have a chance of defending themselves... from day 1. Naturally you would see groups working together to get the edge. Teamwork , good coordination and skill would be needed to win. Not who has wasted the most time grinding and gathering uber gear.
Their should be forms of progression in the game, but in a different way. Their should be several guilds that are permanent fixtures in the world. These guilds would be player run and coordinated and have some NPC armies to command. Progression would come in for who is in command of these guilds. The positions would be determined by contributions to the guild in the for of money or meaningfull tasks that actually affect the world. Positions avaliable would vary by the type of contribution. Example would be working for the military and having the opportunity to become squad leader or captain ect... and controll NPC armies in battle. Or donate money and have the chance to get into politics and help decide the course of action the guild will take.
Then you have towns these would be like the guilds we know. Residents would need to contribute and work together to maintain and grow. Each town would have it's own economy. Their would be no permanent NPC vendors linked to eachother. You buy and sell what you and your town needs to survive and grow. You would make trade agreements with your neighbors to grow and prosper. Or when trade agreements fail and action is needed go to war for those materials.
Live events should be happening all the time. Where a Dev ( or someone) summons help with different situations and encounters from all the players in the area. These are much more interesting than regular quests.
Perma Death and ageing would allow a sense of completion for characters that live out long lives as well as prevent the game from getting too stagnant with the same character for too long. Ageing could give some advantages like political pull ( when the sword arm ain't as stong as it once was) and here you would have the opportunity to make changes on a larger scale in the game world. Your legacy would carry on, with your last name.( debatable if it is PD) but will maintain posession of all the previous characters holdings.
A game built allong these lines would have a ton of potential, and open the door for great new possibilities for MMOs explore in the future. In a game like this you would atleast be able to take pride in what you have done and be able to see the results in the changes of the world arround you.
Shane
Comments
For the most part you are talking about Darkfall online.
100% skill based progression. PVP centric. Player controlled economy. Most all items are craftable. A small group of newbs (3-7), depending on keyboard/mouse skill, can defeat (1-2) veteran players with decent keyboard/mouse skills. Guild/clan controlled cities. A lot more options ingame than current level based MMO's.
Two things that you mentioned that is not in Darkfall is permadeath and aging. To this date no game is perfect.
If you are one of those guys that are inspired to play a game just its graphics are out of this world, Darkfall might not be your game. The good news is that another game with potentially all the options that you want plus awesome graphics is called Mortal online.
I suggest you check out Darkfall online first. It is due to go retail in December.
If you want to play Mortal online it is supposed to come out summer of 09
Good luck and good gaming.
Yeah I have my eye on Darkfall. Just hope they do it right. And no graphics are a not a high concern for me, I prefer playability and depth rather than a purely visual experiance. ( bought RomaVictor after all)
Just hope Darkfall dosent do the same lame crap they did and turn skill based game into a extreme lvl grind x 100.... you would get skills every now and then ( seemed random) and the tasks needed to gain in those skills took forever to complete. Even for basic crap like making pile of wood... after you gathered the wood it would take you 30 seconds per peice to stack it LMFAO. They have been adjusting and all but I am not following it much anymore mabe they fixed it some but probably not.
Game companies just need to realize that people dont want to have to spend hours of their time( get less as you get older) doing crap in game to get your character to a point where you can play them and do the things you want to with them. especialy since most of us already have jobs(dont need another) and are playing to escape that crap and paying for it ...
I am sure dark fall will be a good game but I doubt they will have it so you choose all your stats and skills and all that at creation and then hone it from there. You will have to completely grind that skill( and probably many more) up to a high lvl to be able to compete I am sure. But will still be better than LvL treadmill I am sure.
Shane
He's not talking about Darkfall online. No one knows waht that game will be like. He's talking about game design. Darkfall online my be like RF online for all you know, since no one has ever played a beta.
Anyway, I agree. There's really not much difference between levels, and skill levels. I am level 50. I have skill level 50 in blaster pistol, or sword swinging. What's the difference? Not much.
Really, you aren't talking about skills vs levels, since you're talking about a game with no real progression. Levels aren't an issue, since there is no progression. It doen't matter how you make your character if there is no progression.
For example, you can pick from a bunch of skills. Ok. But what if therfe are 100 classes to choose from? Same thing. So it's not skills vs classes, it's progression vs no progression.
But what are you going to do? Half of an MMORPG is advancing your character, either in levels, or skill levels. You've now removed that.
Why fight mobs? No reason really, unless you're leaving in a grind for gear? Or it's just PvP all the time? Or a crafting game?
He's not talking about Darkfall online. No one knows waht that game will be like. He's talking about game design. Darkfall online my be like RF online for all you know, since no one has ever played a beta.
I don't see how arguing "we don't know what the game will be like" is any different than arguing that the game will never come out at all. I mean, what incentive would the developers have for flat out lying to us, and then releasing the game anyways?
Based on what we've been told about Darkfall, I'd say the comparison is fair.
He's not talking about Darkfall online. No one knows waht that game will be like. He's talking about game design. Darkfall online my be like RF online for all you know, since no one has ever played a beta.
I don't see how arguing "we don't know what the game will be like" is any different than arguing that the game will never come out at all. I mean, what incentive would the developers have for flat out lying to us, and then releasing the game anyways?
Based on what we've been told about Darkfall, I'd say the comparison is fair.
Because we don't know what Darkfall will be like. It's like saying, this game will be exactly like WAR, 6 months before WAR releases.
WAR is not exactly like the developers said it was going to be 6 months before it released.
Or it's like saying this game will be just like Age of Conan, 6 months before AoC released. What would that mean? AoC was certainly nothign like the Devs said it was going to be.
It's better to discuss the features and the design elements, rather than compare to a non-existent game.
It will be like Darkfall. What's that mean? That it will be just like Habbo Hotel, or EQ2, or LotRo? We have no idea, since no one has ever played Darkfall. Maybe it will have half the features they say it does, maybe it will have double. But we don't know, so comparing to something that is an unknown seems silly.
After people play the beta of Darkfall, and we know waht the game is actually like, then you could say, that will be just like Darkfall. Then that would make sense, IMO.
Has a game ever released and been exactly like what the developers said it would be? No. So again, you have no idea what Darkfall will be like, till people play it.
Plus, just this week on this forum, I've seen at least 5 people say "this is exactly what Darkfall will be like" and it was 5 different things.
So again, that's confusing. Better to discuss features and design elements.
He's not talking about Darkfall online. No one knows waht that game will be like. He's talking about game design. Darkfall online my be like RF online for all you know, since no one has ever played a beta.
I don't see how arguing "we don't know what the game will be like" is any different than arguing that the game will never come out at all. I mean, what incentive would the developers have for flat out lying to us, and then releasing the game anyways?
Based on what we've been told about Darkfall, I'd say the comparison is fair.
Because we don't know what Darkfall will be like. It's like saying, this game will be exactly like WAR, 6 months before WAR releases.
WAR is not exactly like the developers said it was going to be 6 months before it released.
Or it's like saying this game will be just like Age of Conan, 6 months before AoC released. What would that mean? AoC was certainly nothign like the Devs said it was going to be.
It's better to discuss the features and the design elements, rather than compare to a non-existent game.
It will be like Darkfall. What's that mean? That it will be just like Habbo Hotel, or EQ2, or LotRo? We have no idea, since no one has ever played Darkfall. Maybe it will have half the features they say it does, maybe it will have double. But we don't know, so comparing to something that is an unknown seems silly.
After people play the beta of Darkfall, and we know waht the game is actually like, then you could say, that will be just like Darkfall. Then that would make sense, IMO.
Has a game ever released and been exactly like what the developers said it would be? No. So again, you have no idea what Darkfall will be like, till people play it.
The games may not have been exactly what they were advertised as, but to say they were as night-and-day different as Darkfall and LotRO is just absurd. Stop trolling.
He's not talking about Darkfall online. No one knows waht that game will be like. He's talking about game design. Darkfall online my be like RF online for all you know, since no one has ever played a beta.
I don't see how arguing "we don't know what the game will be like" is any different than arguing that the game will never come out at all. I mean, what incentive would the developers have for flat out lying to us, and then releasing the game anyways?
Based on what we've been told about Darkfall, I'd say the comparison is fair.
Because we don't know what Darkfall will be like. It's like saying, this game will be exactly like WAR, 6 months before WAR releases.
WAR is not exactly like the developers said it was going to be 6 months before it released.
Or it's like saying this game will be just like Age of Conan, 6 months before AoC released. What would that mean? AoC was certainly nothign like the Devs said it was going to be.
It's better to discuss the features and the design elements, rather than compare to a non-existent game.
It will be like Darkfall. What's that mean? That it will be just like Habbo Hotel, or EQ2, or LotRo? We have no idea, since no one has ever played Darkfall. Maybe it will have half the features they say it does, maybe it will have double. But we don't know, so comparing to something that is an unknown seems silly.
After people play the beta of Darkfall, and we know waht the game is actually like, then you could say, that will be just like Darkfall. Then that would make sense, IMO.
Has a game ever released and been exactly like what the developers said it would be? No. So again, you have no idea what Darkfall will be like, till people play it.
The games may not have been exactly what they were advertised as, but to say they were as night-and-day different as Darkfall and LotRO is just absurd. Stop trolling.
I disagree. The actual AoC release, and what players were saying it was going to be a year before release, are IMO night and day.
I have no idea waht Darkfall is going to be like, and neither do you, and even if you think you do, 5 people will have a different idea of what it might be like.
If a year before AoC released, I said this game is going to be exaclty like AoC, what would that mean?
Or, what if I said, this game will be exactly like Dark and Light, a year before that released. What would that mean? Certainly not what Dark and Light turned out to be, right?
He's not talking about Darkfall online. No one knows waht that game will be like. He's talking about game design. Darkfall online my be like RF online for all you know, since no one has ever played a beta.
I don't see how arguing "we don't know what the game will be like" is any different than arguing that the game will never come out at all. I mean, what incentive would the developers have for flat out lying to us, and then releasing the game anyways?
Based on what we've been told about Darkfall, I'd say the comparison is fair.
Because we don't know what Darkfall will be like. It's like saying, this game will be exactly like WAR, 6 months before WAR releases.
WAR is not exactly like the developers said it was going to be 6 months before it released.
Or it's like saying this game will be just like Age of Conan, 6 months before AoC released. What would that mean? AoC was certainly nothign like the Devs said it was going to be.
It's better to discuss the features and the design elements, rather than compare to a non-existent game.
It will be like Darkfall. What's that mean? That it will be just like Habbo Hotel, or EQ2, or LotRo? We have no idea, since no one has ever played Darkfall. Maybe it will have half the features they say it does, maybe it will have double. But we don't know, so comparing to something that is an unknown seems silly.
After people play the beta of Darkfall, and we know waht the game is actually like, then you could say, that will be just like Darkfall. Then that would make sense, IMO.
Has a game ever released and been exactly like what the developers said it would be? No. So again, you have no idea what Darkfall will be like, till people play it.
The games may not have been exactly what they were advertised as, but to say they were as night-and-day different as Darkfall and LotRO is just absurd. Stop trolling.
I disagree. The actual AoC release, and what players were saying it was going to be a year before release, are IMO night and day.
I have no idea waht Darkfall is going to be like, and neither do you, and even if you think you do, 5 people will have a different idea of what it might be like.
If a year before AoC released, I said this game is going to be exaclty like AoC, what would that mean?
It's one thing to release a broken and buggy shell of what was clearly supposed to be a PvP game, and another thing all together to say you're going to release a PvP game and instead release LotRO. Your comments mostly consist of extreme exaggeration and remote possibilities, neither of which are relevant to the comparison.
God forbid you ever get married... your wife might cheat on you. What will you do then? The answer should be obvious, and the same applies here. We can't go around worrying what might happen in the future; the only information we have to go on is what we know, and we have NO reason to think Darkfall won't be what they say it is.
It's one thing to release a broken and buggy shell of what was clearly supposed to be a PvP game, and another thing all together to say you're going to release a PvP game and instead release LotRO. Your comments mostly consist of extreme exaggeration and remote possibilities, neither of which are relevant to the comparison.
God forbid you ever get married... your wife might cheat on you. What will you do then? The answer should be obvious, and the same applies here. We can't go around worrying what might happen in the future; the only information we have to go on is what we know, and we have NO reason to think Darkfall won't be what they say it is.
I disagree. We have every reason to think Darkfall won't be what they say it is. No MMORPG ever is.
I thought Vanguard was going to be a great MMORPG, till I played the beta.
The actual game is always very different from teh description of the game.
With Darkfall, you have a description, but no game. It's very unlikely the game will be exactly like the description. If it is, it will be the first.
Until then, IMO, it makes more sense to discuss game features, rather than compare to a theoretical release.
In other words better to say, I want FFA PvP witth full looting, instead of I want PvP just like Darkfall. What will PvP be like in Darkfall? No one knows.
As far as the "what if you get married" comment, it's almost always an indication you are losing your train of thought when you comment on the poster, rather than the topic.
I agree with the poster who said that if you remove levels then how will you get charcter progression? I remember me and a group of friends were discussing why Zelda is not considered to be a RPG and we came to think that maybe it was because Link did not gain levels. Even at the End Game it was the same Link that you started with but he onnly had better gear. So if you dont progress in levels the only other thing I can think of if progressing by obtaining better gear. If would be intresting to see a MMO with a system like that.
PS
Can we please talk about a game without somebody bringing up Darkfall?
I don't quite agree with the poster's view on level less MMO. It is interesting to go in a new direction, but if a game is out that you can achieve your max potential on day one as far as character development goes, I probably won't play for more than a week.
Character development is essential for MMO, even if you take the levels away, you will still need some form of character development, other wise most people might be bored pretty fast after creating all sort of character in a few days, the game would be left with a small amount of enthusiasts. The developer need to make enough money to justify making a game, other wise it is just a crushing loss, and also means some people lose their jobs.
Here is an example of a level less mmo conversation (assuming the archetype of current mmo is still in effect) :
Player A: Wow, that boss was hard.
Player B: Seriously, I can't believe I was one shotted.
Player A: Yeah, I think we need to find more people for this.
Player C: How hard was the boss?
Player A: Very hard.
Player C: About how hard?
Player B: Hmmm, I don't quite know how to put it.
Player C: What do you mean? There as to be a way to describe it.
Player B: I'd say it is stronger than us.
Player C: Ummm, I kinda guessed that.
Player A: I am starting to miss the level system.
GM: I am sorry, this game does not have the notion of leveling. This level talk is considered inappropriate, you three shall be jailed for 12 hours starting now.
Neosai, you make it sound like it couldn't work. The first truly successful MMO (not the first MMO, but the first one to make it big) was Ultima Online and it was without levels. Your example of how a convo would go is just silly. A creature too powerful for you was described as such. There were no half-witted "Who's on first base"-esq conversations to follow.
As for people getting bored, also not true. If anything, you've got it 180 backwards. Level based content is more restrictive. Once content is out-leveled, nobody does it over again for fun. In UO, there were reasons to go everywhere. Not to mention the fact that a game not level drive is rarely story driven, and while I see your logic that this would allow players to get bored, it hasn't in the past. Players end up making their own content, their own events, their own enemies and their own allies. UO's been around forever and it's old gameplay is still loved. The only reason it doesn't compete today is because the developers tried to shape it into something it wasn't, plus it's just out-dated visually.
I can understand the reluctancy of removing levels and where people would think that players would have no reason to stay. But that is far from the case they would just need to get creative and come up with some fresh ideas.
As I had mentioned their should be permanent guilds that players can progress in and directly change the world in the game. These guilds would be where the majority PvP focused players would flock. Others would go for the politics when taking a break from battle or just interested in holding the reigns on the kingdom.
The player guilds(towns) I mentioned would be the driving factor for the economy in trade and would directly affect the kingdoms they are built in. These would be the hubs for crafters and adventurers in need of gear for their trade or journeys. But would also be a source of contention for the permanent guilds(kingdoms).
As far as the world goes I am thinking in terms of a much larger world than these current games have. Trade off would be that we wouldn't have as detailed a world in terms of all the grass and dew drops on leaves, but would have a world that would be large enough that you could travel at a pace where you feel like you are getting somewhere but where you will probably never see half of it. To help make that possible and a challenge to overcome, you would have to have hunger and things liek the weather make adventuring a true adventure and a challenge. You would need to plan appropriately and adapt to the environment and new situations that arrise.
Like for example. You go out have tons of food and all the gear you think you will need. You come upon a what looks like a cave that is partialy submerged in water it looks rather interesting and you would like to explore. Only it is freezing outside and you would have to swim to get to the entrance. You can try braving the water and venturing in but risk catching cold falling ill and having to return to town and cut the adventure short. Or you can mark the location and plan a new trip when the weather permits.
Since it would be more difficult when adventuring and the world is so huge ( and hopefull still growing) their would be new places to find and new resources to exploit. And of course their would need to be interesting challenges and encounters throughout. One of the big challenges would be keeping the food in supply on long trips as you cant carry it all. You would want a ranger type char with you to hunting/tracking as hunting would need to be more realistic. Animals would not stand in one spot they would run and hide as first sight/sound of you.
Stuff like that would drive the game, all the player conflict with the Kingdoms and the economic control the towns( player guilds) would have on those kingdoms would create it's own story. And the devs could build on that story with live in game events that everyone in the area can partake of.
Either way I know it is not something that will be happening tomorrow but would just love to hear of a game that fits this description... as close as possible that someone is working on.
Shane
As for being able to tell the difficulty of a enemy you could easily tell by the damage you do to it, or it to you. Part of the challenge is not knowing exactly what you are getting into. Where would the fun be in knowing exactly how many players you need and the exact strategy to defeat an encounter?
Reguardless it would be more about skill in encounters to win not stats. It might one group 10 people in a knock down drag out fight and barely manage ... but another group may do it with 5 through good use of skill and strategy. Knowing when to attack and when to defend or where to strike to be most effective.
And dont forget I want Perma Death. So you would/should take risk seriously. Their should be stuff like adreneline put in so that you have a chance to get away when you are hurt, move faster when it is pumping. And where damage is not gonna kill you in one hit. Yes it is realistic but also a buzz kill in a game. Especialy a Perma death game. Good planning and you can easily survive nearly any encounter but wade in unprepared or thinking you have balls of steel and you can quickly find yourself in a dangerous situation.
(edit) Some situations though (to creat challenges to overcome)would leave you little choice in the matter if you wish to procede.
Shane
Hmmm...... Seems that I started an argument between a Darkfall vaportroll, and Darkfall fanboi.
My intentions with my post was to, and I'll tread cautiously here, suggest that the OP check out two upcoming MMO's. The OP was inquiring about non level progression. That is what these two games claim to have.
Now with that said... I got quite a good laugh at you two morons arguing about my post that you both misunderstood.
Once again to the OP, good luck at finding what you want in a game. When you do I'm sure that I'll run into you.
Oh btw. To that other numb-nut that doesn't want to see the game Darkfall mentioned again, try reading the thread titles. If "Darkfall" or "Mortal" or the phrase "skill progression" is in the title, don't f*cking click on it!
Many mmos still have progression when you reach the level cap.
I like the sound of non-level based games or reduced levels game(see Guild Wars) as they can work. But an interesting question is if you got a world the size of WoW or any other mmo how would you utilize it?
This thread doesn't have Darkfall in the thread title. Are you saying any discussion of skill progression has to include a discussion about Darkfall? Why?
Darkfall will be shit just like all the other low budget mmorpgs that get hype for making promises they can't deliver and claim they arn't run by big evil corps and listen to the community. Even looking at the videos and screenshots of the game I can tell the game will be crap, I mean the art style is more bland and worse than Vanguards.
Create an interesting world to explore, not a dentist.
They wouldn't, as games like WoW have been built from the ground up with levels in mind.
Besides, most skill progression MMOs I've played have larger worlds, with player cities and economies.
Looking for a game with no levels just skill levels and lots of choices on those skills? Want one where you can be anything you choose to be without restrictions other then time? Come look at Ryzom on ryzom.com.
Its not new or flashy since its 4 yrs old and has seen its share of rough times but, everything you asked for and want is there.
For now the new owners are letting people check it out fully for free. Not sure just how long this will last but, free is free for now. Alot of us Pre-CUers came here since in some ways Ryzom is alot like pre CU SWG but, based in a more fantasy genre. One thing I love about Ryzom is the interactive life, predators attack herbivores etc. Plus there is no such thing here as an "uber" player, depending on where you go on Atys (the planet we live on in Ryzom) you can get quickly be dead before you know it. At last count the fully opened skill trees number about 52 various skills, each of which you can level up to 250.
Anyway, like i said its free for now so come by and say hi, you will enjoy our more mature, helpful community if nothing else.
It wasn't even that he had better gear, but that progressing through the game unlocked new kinds of gear which gave you abilities that you didn't have before. It was much more complex than simply leveling up, which any idiot can design.
Skill-progression games are similar, in that your skill in Fishing has no effect on your performance in combat, and likewise, your performance in combat will neither boost nor limit your progression in Fishing. Players are free to pursue what they want, when they want, as much as they want, with very little or no consideration to skills they have no interest in.
In short, the more seperate axes (as in, on a graph) of progression exist in the game, the deeper the game becomes.
I think MO have classes and in summer 2009 i serieusly doub that it was in pre alpha stage in april this year when they first announce this game.
And Darkfall grafhics are very good.
And MO is half of what Darkfall will be, its more oriented towards avarage players no so hardcore, this can chance offcorse becouse its still in early alpha.
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.
AO was the closest thing I have played to a decent no level mmo, they did have levels but the levels were almost meaningless, most equip required skills and the skills determined your strengths, It was nice. I wish there were more modern mmos like AO.
"Good? Bad? I'm the guy with the gun."
Luckely darkfall will not be a game tailor made for guys like you who want easy instant satisfaction for hour play session a day.
Dont play darkfall if you wanne have it all in a short amount of time.
Many times they said train your skills to 100 will not be fast or easy.
But game is designed so you can from moment you come ingame go straight into the action.
And you can name anything that takes time grind, you prolly say this so you can whine and say darkfall is also a grind game:(
Give up your work so you can also be ingame 15hours a day and keep up with hardcore:P
Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.