Originally posted by Waterlily There doesn't need to be progression for an MMO or RPG to exist. It's just an easy business model to keep players hooked on your game for P2P games because P2P companies want your monthly subscription money.
Character progression is what makes an RPG.
It has absolutely nothing to do with P2P subscriptions; RPGs have had levels since the 70s.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Sorry, but this sounds like a concept that would never work...unless you could work out the gameplay to be dynamic enough to accurately represent actual player skill as well as keeping the player base occupied with things to do, odds are it will not happen. And absolute gear based mechanics just encourages in game materialism and cookie cutter syndrome...do you like being defined by your gear and nothing else? I sure don't, in fact the gear based aspects of game grinds are the most annoying, because that gear you spent so much time grinding for will be obsolete sooner or later. Character progression, at the very least in terms of skills, is about the only concrete thing in a game that doesn't become useless or obsolete. Personally, the idea of a game with no skills to even work on sounds fairly dull and uninteresting. At least, this wouldn't work for any kind of montly sub type MMO, maybe you could work it into a F2P game with tons of items to buy in the game shop.
The progress through a story, the progress through content.
The time spent and activities done would be progress enough for RPGers
Read the rest of my post before hijacking this thread in another direction. Progression without rewards vs. progression with rewards is best saved for another day. My stand is not what RPGers deem rewarding when progressing in a skill-less, class-less or level-less MMO, it is the unhealthy dynamic such a system would create when it caters to PvPers who would thrive, while offering little for RPGers to fall back on. The find items just to get plundered routine would grow old fast.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
So yeah, skill-less, level-less, class-less gameplay is possible and was done 10 years ago.
UO was NOT by far any of those things. What game were you playing 10 years ago? I played on Oceania for 5 years from 1998-2003 and it very much had skills, classes and levels (regarding 7GMs) I think you're confused with a game called Tail of The Sun...
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
So yeah, skill-less, level-less, class-less gameplay is possible and was done 10 years ago.
UO was NOT by far any of those things. What game were you playing 10 years ago? I played on Oceania for 5 years from 1998-2003 and it very much had skills, classes and levels (regarding 7GMs) I think you're confused with a game called Tail of The Sun...
You could 5x GM and get all your stats set in a day.
Only skill that really took a long time to max Magic Resist.
There were no classes and levels. I think you are confused. I played from 97 to 2004. From Beta pre-Trammel to Age of Shadows. Played on Atlantic and Siege Perilous, the "hardcore" shard.
If you couldn't get a new character to a competitive level in your skills in a day or two you were doing something wrong.
i never understood "equipment based" MMO's...i guess thats why i never liked WoW...it seems more like a second job and bragging rights...
i like what the OP has in mind tho...alot of company's should following the "skilled-based" MMO route and have you pick your own skills/powers/whatever,
for example, when you gain a "level" you should get a point to stick into WHATEVER you want, no class will ever be the same
players love diversity and it makes them feel unique to what they want to do
So yeah, skill-less, level-less, class-less gameplay is possible and was done 10 years ago.
UO was NOT by far any of those things. What game were you playing 10 years ago? I played on Oceania for 5 years from 1998-2003 and it very much had skills, classes and levels (regarding 7GMs) I think you're confused with a game called Tail of The Sun...
You could 5x GM and get all your stats set in a day.
Only skill that really took a long time to max Magic Resist.
There were no classes and levels. I think you are confused. I played from 97 to 2004. From Beta pre-Trammel to Age of Shadows. Played on Atlantic and Siege Perilous, the "hardcore" shard.
If you couldn't get a new character to a competitive level in your skills in a day or two you were doing something wrong.
What "class" you were was determined by the skills you started with. And if those skilled changed then your "class" would too. Warrior, Beggar, Bard, Scout, Thief and Tamer are naming a few you could start as. Yes nothing was set in stone but you did have classes nonetheless. And you got 700 skill points to max in 45+ skills but older players had 720 points
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
The progress through a story, the progress through content.
The time spent and activities done would be progress enough for RPGers
Read the rest of my post before hijacking this thread in another direction.
Ive read your post and my intention was to change the direction:
Progress doesnt need to be measured objectivelly in numbers like level, health, damage, number/level of skills.
Neither does MMOs games have to segregate people in power (measured objectivelly).
Thats the whole escape point.
People progress through level-less content, they progress through events and stories that can be done from day one.
Horizontal Character Progress is what Im talking about.
!= Vertical Character Progress wich is the structural problem of todays MMOs, because people think about being vertically superior, and that requires time and effort they dont have (and even if they had, the content is boring, therefore its side effect is grind, wich is bad as well) or money (from RMT, cash shop, pay to win scams of f2p games). Vertical Character Progress is a pain, remove it from the MMOs, you can satisfy MMO's requisites of character progression in a persistent world with horizontal progression. Its possible!
Then you say: but we cant remove competition from it, how is it possible in a horizontal character progression structure? How do we attract and satisfy both PVPers (what I call Killers) and Achievers, and Roleplayers alike?
Make effectiveness based on subjective factors. Players skill, reflexes, wits, inteligence, organization, knowledge, coordination, exploration, socialization, strategy, whatever, make it so all people can use is based on what players are and what they built socially or learned from experience or using their brains. Got it? That is the closest you can get from real life. Its not fair that some players have superior "subjective traits" than others, but so does life. People wont say "I wont play it because my effectiveness is based on myself, and I suck so I prefer a korean grinder mmo where I rule because I am a no lifer or a cash shop game where I rule because I can pay to win". No, people wont say that. Its rethoric.
Its an old theorical concept that remains untouched in the practice by todays mmos.
Thats because vertical content (to satisfy vertical character progression) is easy to make and re-use, but horizontal character progression is stuff of legends and only a few games managed to do that.
Progress doesnt need to be measured objectivelly in numbers like level, health, damage, number/level of skills. Neither does MMOs games have to segregate people in power (measured objectivelly). Thats the whole escape point. People progress through level-less content, they progress through events and stories that can be done from day one. Horizontal Character Progress is what Im talking about. != Vertical Character Progress wich is the structural problem of todays MMOs, because people think about being vertically superior, and that requires time and effort they dont have (and even if they had, the content is boring, therefore its side effect is grind, wich is bad as well) or money (from RMT, cash shop, pay to win scams of f2p games). Vertical Character Progress is a pain, remove it from the MMOs, you can satisfy MMO's requisites of character progression in a persistent world with horizontal progression. Its possible!
I agree so totally and completely and have been trying to push this point for a while now.
You can give players more "power" and make them feel stronger and better without having to use levels and gear and other objectivelly measured numbers.
The biggest problem is vertical scaling. Level 1 has 100 health and does 10 damage and level 10 has 1000 health and does 100 damage. That kind of crap.
Give players "progression" by giving them options, tactical choices.
The new player has a simpe collection of skills, very basic, where as the advanced player has a more advanced set of skills. The new player still has a chance to defeat the advanced player, since they can do the same damage and have the same health points, but the advanced player has more options to buff/debuff bleed/trap/snare etc. etc. so they have more TACTICAL abilities.
Then you can use special item sets and gear rewards for completing cool content that are purely asthetic, because players really just want to look cool and feel powerful in the end, and throw in an achievement system that does nothing for the player but give them special Titles and a rap sheet of their accomplishments and you've got enough progress for a LOT of people, without all the BS.
Interesting, thank you for defining horizontal progress from vertical progress.
What if there was a mixture of both vertical and horizontal progress? That is, yes, going from pistol to machine gun would be an obvious upgrade- but also, have available things like silencers, grenade-launcher attachments. Would you like a bullet proof vest, or camoflage? There could be jetpacks, vehicles, devices for breathing under water, implants to allow your character to move faster, goggles for night vision, radar, long-range cruise missile launchers vs short range grenade launchers, and so on.
Items like these give both verticle and horizontal changes to a character, because they provide both asthetic differences, and some amount of leverage/advantage in mechanical gameplay. With so many items, it really becomes a matter of style. If you've played Call of Duty 4, they've done this very well. There are elements of both horizontal AND verticle choices.
To give a few examples of fantasy-based items that work like this: Sheilds, nets, various weapons/armor, a ring that makes you invisible (like lord of the rings :P ), magical scrolls, potions/poisons, runes, etc.
If you've played world of warcraft, their equipment system is kind of like a puzzle-game in and of itself. If you're off to fight onyxia, you'll want all your fire-resist gear on, and so on. You could have a system like that where if you're off to take on challenge X, then night vision and stealth might be the best way, or you'll need people to tank in the front and long-range people with high damage in the back. With a skill-less, level-less, class-less sytem, then equipment would be the only way. Furthermore, switching your playstyle from the stealth approach to the tank approach would simply be a matter of whether or not you have the proper equipment.
An equipment-based system is capable in terms of providing both horizontal AND verticle change, however it does have features that are totally different from a typical skill, or level, or class-based system.
For example player A, who has gathered many items, can go to player B, and right at the onset, player B can have the item of massive destruction. But I don't really see that as an inherritnly bad thing. I see that as freedom.
This brings the question : How do players get the equipment in the first place?- this is the part that I haven't got a perfect answer to. I was thinking that every player would be given a basic "crafter" item, that takes raw resources, or capital goods, and produces starter items from those goods. Basically giving the player the ability to start crafting something towards their playstyle. Don't let that item produce every other item in the game! Make it so that you have to "tech up" kind of like how there are "tech levels" in most Real-Time-Strategy games, such as warcraft and command and conquer.
I didn't originally come here to debate whether or not this system was feasible, but I do enjoy the debate. It's forced me to refine my position on all of this and get a clearer picture of what it is that I'm asking for. Anyways, it doesn't look like there's any mmog or rpg that is truely skill-less/class-less/level-less, so I guess I'll have to just wait, or program one myself! Cheers
Progress doesnt need to be measured objectivelly in numbers like level, health, damage, number/level of skills. Neither does MMOs games have to segregate people in power (measured objectivelly). Thats the whole escape point. People progress through level-less content, they progress through events and stories that can be done from day one. Horizontal Character Progress is what Im talking about. != Vertical Character Progress wich is the structural problem of todays MMOs, because people think about being vertically superior, and that requires time and effort they dont have (and even if they had, the content is boring, therefore its side effect is grind, wich is bad as well) or money (from RMT, cash shop, pay to win scams of f2p games). Vertical Character Progress is a pain, remove it from the MMOs, you can satisfy MMO's requisites of character progression in a persistent world with horizontal progression. Its possible!
I agree so totally and completely and have been trying to push this point for a while now.
You can give players more "power" and make them feel stronger and better without having to use levels and gear and other objectivelly measured numbers.
The biggest problem is vertical scaling. Level 1 has 100 health and does 10 damage and level 10 has 1000 health and does 100 damage. That kind of crap.
Give players "progression" by giving them options, tactical choices.
The new player has a simpe collection of skills, very basic, where as the advanced player has a more advanced set of skills. The new player still has a chance to defeat the advanced player, since they can do the same damage and have the same health points, but the advanced player has more options to buff/debuff bleed/trap/snare etc. etc. so they have more TACTICAL abilities.
Then you can use special item sets and gear rewards for completing cool content that are purely asthetic, because players really just want to look cool and feel powerful in the end, and throw in an achievement system that does nothing for the player but give them special Titles and a rap sheet of their accomplishments and you've got enough progress for a LOT of people, without all the BS.
Heerobya and Interesting, this is basically what I'm after too (although I'd prefer some learning curve in the form of skill gain). I think maybe we all have our own specific view of how you do this, and I'd be interested in some examples from each of you, if you please.
Heerobya and Interesting, this is basically what I'm after too (although I'd prefer some learning curve in the form of skill gain). I think maybe we all have our own specific view of how you do this, and I'd be interested in some examples from each of you, if you please.
In order for combat in a MMO, be it fantasy or sci fi or whatever, to NOT be about numerical differences created through disparity between statistics... i.e. better gear and higher levels mean bigger numbers more power more health etc. or as I like to call it "numerical inflation."
W/O being "twitch" based, which has had very mixed and not-so-encouraging results whenever it's been tried in a MMO...
It has to be about strategy and timing.
Knowing what ability or skill to use, and when to use it, instead of just knowing which ability does the most damage or prevents the highest numerical value of damage.
Min/maxing your characters stats is not strategy or skill. It's mathematics and the ability to research.
What I propose for a system of horizontal character progression, that still relies on the principle of a basic learning curve to differentiate new players from veterans, AND allow for character advancement (a major staple of RPGs and MMORPGs)...
Is how I presented it earlier.
A new player starts with a few basic skills. Lets call them basic attack skill, basic defense skill, basic combo skill.
A veteran player has these same skills, at the same level of power/damage/defense as the new player, but they also have buff/debuff skills, movement imparing/enhanceing skills, dots and bleeds, snares and roots...
The two players, noob and veteran, could stand toe to toe and it'd be an even match. But the veteran player has a lot of tools in his/her arsenal that the noob does not, and thus can swing the fight in their favor through proper strategy and timing.
So as you use your weapons and skills, you gain new skills to use, not more powerful ones. You gain more variety, more breadth of abilities added to your arsenal... you upgrade the tool set not the tools.
If you think about it, what changes as you advance in PvE in most MMO games? Do the mobs/npcs you fight gain more abilities and start using more advanced strategies against you? Not really. What normally happens is instead of having 500 health and doing 100 damage they have 5,000 health and do 1,000 damage.
But since you, the player, are also advancing... you also have more health and do more damage. Nothing has actually changed between the encounters in the beginning of the game and those later on then the number of digits.
Imagine PvP where it's not about who has the biggest and baddest sword, but PvP about who has the best strategy, who has the fastest reaction time and knows how to use their abilities the best? Everything has a counter and a counter counter and a counter to that counter counter. PvP becomes a chess match played at the speed of light with opponents truly dueling, probing each others weaknesses and maneuvering into position for the kill.
Nowadays? Generally the person with the best gear and/or highest level will win 99% of the time. Linear, vertical numerical inflation. Advancement based soley on increasing the digit count.
Imagine PvE where you face more challenging creatures or groups/entire armies of creatures... where your wit and your teamwork and your skill determine victory, not how many +damage modifiers you have stacked on your toon.
It can be done. Mobs/NPCs in games already use abilities, have different behavior including group dynamics and using range and responding differently to player driven stimulus. It's still just scripts and if/then statements, it doesn't require any super advanced AI or insane processing power, just some thought on the developers part how to make every encounter more interesting.
They already do it with boss encounters in most raid-centric games, and they HAVE gotten better in recent years with mobs/npcs that use different tactics on players other then "run up and smack" or "sit and shoot/cast."
Throw in things like collision detection (used in many games) and line of site (used in most games) and you can use real strategy and tactics to defeat complex, challenging PvE and PvP encounters.. instead of just stacking numbers and maxing out your stats.
Horizontal advancement. True increases in difficulty and challenge. All possible.
Heerobya and Interesting, this is basically what I'm after too (although I'd prefer some learning curve in the form of skill gain). I think maybe we all have our own specific view of how you do this, and I'd be interested in some examples from each of you, if you please.
In order for combat in a MMO, be it fantasy or sci fi or whatever, to NOT be about numerical differences created through disparity between statistics... i.e. better gear and higher levels mean bigger numbers more power more health etc. or as I like to call it "numerical inflation."
W/O being "twitch" based, which has had very mixed and not-so-encouraging results whenever it's been tried in a MMO...
It has to be about strategy and timing.
Knowing what ability or skill to use, and when to use it, instead of just knowing which ability does the most damage or prevents the highest numerical value of damage.
Min/maxing your characters stats is not strategy or skill. It's mathematics and the ability to research.
What I propose for a system of horizontal character progression, that still relies on the principle of a basic learning curve to differentiate new players from veterans, AND allow for character advancement (a major staple of RPGs and MMORPGs)...
Is how I presented it earlier.
A new player starts with a few basic skills. Lets call them basic attack skill, basic defense skill, basic combo skill.
A veteran player has these same skills, at the same level of power/damage/defense as the new player, but they also have buff/debuff skills, movement imparing/enhanceing skills, dots and bleeds, snares and roots...
The two players, noob and veteran, could stand toe to toe and it'd be an even match. But the veteran player has a lot of tools in his/her arsenal that the noob does not, and thus can swing the fight in their favor through proper strategy and timing.
So as you use your weapons and skills, you gain new skills to use, not more powerful ones. You gain more variety, more breadth of abilities added to your arsenal... you upgrade the tool set not the tools.
The problem is that the abilities act as Power Multiplyers.
eg:
In a fight player A and B can do 10 damage per sec (10 DPS), during 10 sec they will each do 100 damage. however, If player A has a stun ability that stops player B from attacking fro 5sec then player A now does 100 damage and player B 50 damage.
So if the fight lasts 10 sec then the Effective Power level of player A is twice that of Player B. Of course the longer the fight is and the longer the cooldown on the stun is the less of an effect it will have on the outcome.
There is a reason why players in WoW hate the rogue's StunLock ore the warlocks chain fears.
That won't be very fun game unless they got something fun to replace it, an rpg stands for role-playing, and you do need class to display your character's abilities, you do need skill to improve your abilities, leveling up just show how powerful you are and how many low levels might think "I want to get that piece of awesome weapon and armor!". However, leveling is not very nessassery to be used but most mmorpg just place it there for status and let people know who to face and what not to in an easy way.
That won't be very fun game unless they got something fun to replace it, an rpg stands for role-playing, and you do need class to display your character's abilities, you do need skill to improve your abilities, leveling up just show how powerful you are and how many low levels might think "I want to get that piece of awesome weapon and armor!". However, leveling is not very nessassery to be used but most mmorpg just place it there for status and let people know who to face and what not to in an easy way.
Reading comments such as the poster above made me remember why I usually dont bother repplying or interacting with people. Its like a never ending affair, like for every hydra head you remove, many more are born from where the last one fell. Or the topic about defining MMO, if I stop or continue, it doesnt make a difference, the next week there will be more people to school.
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs are about vertical character progression?
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs have to have classes, levels and skills?
Thats why current MMOs suck and will continue to suck, because people are so ignorant and have no idea what its been shoved down their throats.
Is a nightmare, for every head, another seven rise up...
A skill-less, class-less, level-less game could exist, but it would either be purely gear-based, or predominantly playerskill-based.
Games which are predominantly about player skill might more closely resemble another genre entirely, but they might still be MMORPGs at their core (example: if Guild Wars had no stats or classes, but instead you were just a class-less avatar who collected Abilities, and you equipped a limited number of your collected Abilities to use in combat.)
Games which are purely gear-based would be unique and you could probably get reasonable progression out of it. Basically all the effort normally spread between level, gear, and stats progression would be concentrated purely on making gear progression especially deep and interesting.
The more you stray from being an RPG, the better these ideas seem. Trying to cling to RPG progression and ditching skills, classes, and levels will introduce some unique problems your game would have to solve to keep things fun.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
That won't be very fun game unless they got something fun to replace it, an rpg stands for role-playing, and you do need class to display your character's abilities, you do need skill to improve your abilities, leveling up just show how powerful you are and how many low levels might think "I want to get that piece of awesome weapon and armor!". However, leveling is not very nessassery to be used but most mmorpg just place it there for status and let people know who to face and what not to in an easy way.
Reading comments such as the poster above made me remember why I usually dont bother repplying or interacting with people. Its like a never ending affair, like for every hydra head you remove, many more are born from where the last one fell. Or the topic about defining MMO, if I stop or continue, it doesnt make a difference, the next week there will be more people to school.
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs are about vertical character progression?
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs have to have classes, levels and skills?
Thats why current MMOs suck and will continue to suck, because people are so ignorant and have no idea what its been shoved down their throats.
Is a nightmare, for every head, another seven rise up...
Try playing Magic:TG or old school D&D and you would be surprised what elements it has. And don't tell me you do, because then you would not make this comment.
Mentioning D&D and Magic the Gathering... What a fool.
LOL.
Just because D&D has skills, levels or classes doesnt mean RPGs have to have it. Reducing/Stereotyping RPG to D&D is fail. Even more fail is mentioning Magic the Gathering in the same sentence, now that is utter fail.
Seriously kid, stop embarassing yourself. Good God.
Mentioning D&D and Magic the Gathering... What a fool. LOL. Just because D&D has skills, levels or classes doesnt mean RPGs have to have it. Reducing/Stereotyping RPG to D&D is fail. Even more fail is mentioning Magic the Gathering in the same sentence, now that is utter fail. Seriously kid, stop embarassing yourself. Good God.
Yes of course, stereotyping rpgs to contain something that's in every rpg...
Every console RPG with a few notable exceptions (fallout, elder scrolls to name a couple) contain levels
In those games that do NOT, skills are used as an alternate form of progression.
Every game has classes. Let me tell you. Even the much-touted EvE does. People decide on a role, then arrange their stats/skills/whatever to accomplish that role. That, sir, is what a class is. A rose by any other name is still the same flower.
Sigh. Look, I understand you're wanting to think outside the box. In fact I applaud it. Now, can the vitriol and explain to me how you want a character driven role playing game to allow players to develop beyond whatever they start with without the above items. And I don't mean that it can't be done. I want you to tell me what you want to see in an MMO that allows progression of a character without those items.
Or, you're suggesting an MMO without progression. Essentially, counterstrike.
While it still has skills of a sort, I think the closest thing to this would be EVE Online. In EVE, you can improve any skill that you want at any time, if you first obtain the skill book to gain the 1st level, and are willing to take the time to learn the skill. The higher the skill ranks, the longer it takes to learn.
I could see something like this being in place for just about any game out there. You've got a great concept here, and if you find something that fits what your thinking, please let me know, as I would be interested in playing it.
If the game has no skills or levels, it really would be an RPG as it lacks one of the huge cornerstones, character development. You would, at that point, have an action game.
Otherwise, that makes every game that exists an RPG, being you remove the real defining factor, character development. Gear is not character development. You're not developing the character, only what he uses.
In short, no, no RPG exists like this, because if it did, it would not be an RPG. There are plenty of acion, adventure, racing, and shooting titles for you to choose from.
I just got to read some of the later comments about where people have learned RPGs need to have character progression. Because, if not it's not an RPG. Games do need some definition. Now, let me point something out:
Maps of all sizes, from the largest to the smallest
Lore
Memorable Characters (BioShock anyone?)
Exploration
First person perspective
Gameplay can be open-ended or fairly pigeonholed.
What is the defining charateristic between them? RPGs have strong character progression. if you remove that, it's an Action/Adventure delivered slightly differently.
____________________________ Telthalion Rohircil - Guardian - Elemandir - Lord of The Rings Online --- == RIP == Torey - Commando - Orion - Tabula Rasa == RIP == --- Jordaniel Torey - Navy Megathron, Active Armor Tank - Tranquility - EVE Online --- Torey Scott - Rifleman - Fallen Earth ____________________________
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein
What is an mmorpg without it's class, levels, and skills? is it just borderline Role-Play? Socialazation? what is it really? Darkfall Online has a level-less game and more concentrated on skills, yes? look how it turned out. How can you make a game that contains non skills, no level, and no class?
What is an mmorpg without it's class, levels, and skills? is it just borderline Role-Play? Socialazation? what is it really? Darkfall Online has a level-less game and more concentrated on skills, yes? look how it turned out. How can you make a game that contains non skills, no level, and no class?
It's just how you define MMO. I play games without levels which are MMO (read my post in this same thread) and they work fine.
You don't need levels or classes to have an "MMO" experience. The "RPG" part can be taken rather loosely imo, it doesn't need to be fantasy, you can be a warrior, or a construction worker or space marine, as long as you are somehwat connected to your character by a story and feel part of the world, giving it an RPG tag is fine imo.
MMORPG will evolve into MMO I think, the 'big' MMORPG companies are trying to hold this back though. Bioware, SoE, Blizzard, NCSoft would love to just continue on the same road and bring out MMORPG after MMORPG LEVEL TREADMILL , because it's easy, makes easy money and doesn't require any new type of gameplay. But it doesn't mean that all games should have levels and skill, because enough games have proven that's not the case.
Comments
Character progression is what makes an RPG.
It has absolutely nothing to do with P2P subscriptions; RPGs have had levels since the 70s.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
Sorry, but this sounds like a concept that would never work...unless you could work out the gameplay to be dynamic enough to accurately represent actual player skill as well as keeping the player base occupied with things to do, odds are it will not happen. And absolute gear based mechanics just encourages in game materialism and cookie cutter syndrome...do you like being defined by your gear and nothing else? I sure don't, in fact the gear based aspects of game grinds are the most annoying, because that gear you spent so much time grinding for will be obsolete sooner or later. Character progression, at the very least in terms of skills, is about the only concrete thing in a game that doesn't become useless or obsolete. Personally, the idea of a game with no skills to even work on sounds fairly dull and uninteresting. At least, this wouldn't work for any kind of montly sub type MMO, maybe you could work it into a F2P game with tons of items to buy in the game shop.
Read the rest of my post before hijacking this thread in another direction. Progression without rewards vs. progression with rewards is best saved for another day. My stand is not what RPGers deem rewarding when progressing in a skill-less, class-less or level-less MMO, it is the unhealthy dynamic such a system would create when it caters to PvPers who would thrive, while offering little for RPGers to fall back on. The find items just to get plundered routine would grow old fast.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
UO was NOT by far any of those things. What game were you playing 10 years ago? I played on Oceania for 5 years from 1998-2003 and it very much had skills, classes and levels (regarding 7GMs) I think you're confused with a game called Tail of The Sun...
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
UO was NOT by far any of those things. What game were you playing 10 years ago? I played on Oceania for 5 years from 1998-2003 and it very much had skills, classes and levels (regarding 7GMs) I think you're confused with a game called Tail of The Sun...
You could 5x GM and get all your stats set in a day.
Only skill that really took a long time to max Magic Resist.
There were no classes and levels. I think you are confused. I played from 97 to 2004. From Beta pre-Trammel to Age of Shadows. Played on Atlantic and Siege Perilous, the "hardcore" shard.
If you couldn't get a new character to a competitive level in your skills in a day or two you were doing something wrong.
i never understood "equipment based" MMO's...i guess thats why i never liked WoW...it seems more like a second job and bragging rights...
i like what the OP has in mind tho...alot of company's should following the "skilled-based" MMO route and have you pick your own skills/powers/whatever,
for example, when you gain a "level" you should get a point to stick into WHATEVER you want, no class will ever be the same
players love diversity and it makes them feel unique to what they want to do
http://acominos.evony.com <- if your bored at work
UO was NOT by far any of those things. What game were you playing 10 years ago? I played on Oceania for 5 years from 1998-2003 and it very much had skills, classes and levels (regarding 7GMs) I think you're confused with a game called Tail of The Sun...
You could 5x GM and get all your stats set in a day.
Only skill that really took a long time to max Magic Resist.
There were no classes and levels. I think you are confused. I played from 97 to 2004. From Beta pre-Trammel to Age of Shadows. Played on Atlantic and Siege Perilous, the "hardcore" shard.
If you couldn't get a new character to a competitive level in your skills in a day or two you were doing something wrong.
What "class" you were was determined by the skills you started with. And if those skilled changed then your "class" would too. Warrior, Beggar, Bard, Scout, Thief and Tamer are naming a few you could start as. Yes nothing was set in stone but you did have classes nonetheless. And you got 700 skill points to max in 45+ skills but older players had 720 points
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Read the rest of my post before hijacking this thread in another direction.
Ive read your post and my intention was to change the direction:
Progress doesnt need to be measured objectivelly in numbers like level, health, damage, number/level of skills.
Neither does MMOs games have to segregate people in power (measured objectivelly).
Thats the whole escape point.
People progress through level-less content, they progress through events and stories that can be done from day one.
Horizontal Character Progress is what Im talking about.
!= Vertical Character Progress wich is the structural problem of todays MMOs, because people think about being vertically superior, and that requires time and effort they dont have (and even if they had, the content is boring, therefore its side effect is grind, wich is bad as well) or money (from RMT, cash shop, pay to win scams of f2p games). Vertical Character Progress is a pain, remove it from the MMOs, you can satisfy MMO's requisites of character progression in a persistent world with horizontal progression. Its possible!
Then you say: but we cant remove competition from it, how is it possible in a horizontal character progression structure? How do we attract and satisfy both PVPers (what I call Killers) and Achievers, and Roleplayers alike?
Make effectiveness based on subjective factors. Players skill, reflexes, wits, inteligence, organization, knowledge, coordination, exploration, socialization, strategy, whatever, make it so all people can use is based on what players are and what they built socially or learned from experience or using their brains. Got it? That is the closest you can get from real life. Its not fair that some players have superior "subjective traits" than others, but so does life. People wont say "I wont play it because my effectiveness is based on myself, and I suck so I prefer a korean grinder mmo where I rule because I am a no lifer or a cash shop game where I rule because I can pay to win". No, people wont say that. Its rethoric.
Its an old theorical concept that remains untouched in the practice by todays mmos.
Thats because vertical content (to satisfy vertical character progression) is easy to make and re-use, but horizontal character progression is stuff of legends and only a few games managed to do that.
I agree so totally and completely and have been trying to push this point for a while now.
You can give players more "power" and make them feel stronger and better without having to use levels and gear and other objectivelly measured numbers.
The biggest problem is vertical scaling. Level 1 has 100 health and does 10 damage and level 10 has 1000 health and does 100 damage. That kind of crap.
Give players "progression" by giving them options, tactical choices.
The new player has a simpe collection of skills, very basic, where as the advanced player has a more advanced set of skills. The new player still has a chance to defeat the advanced player, since they can do the same damage and have the same health points, but the advanced player has more options to buff/debuff bleed/trap/snare etc. etc. so they have more TACTICAL abilities.
Then you can use special item sets and gear rewards for completing cool content that are purely asthetic, because players really just want to look cool and feel powerful in the end, and throw in an achievement system that does nothing for the player but give them special Titles and a rap sheet of their accomplishments and you've got enough progress for a LOT of people, without all the BS.
Interesting, thank you for defining horizontal progress from vertical progress.
What if there was a mixture of both vertical and horizontal progress? That is, yes, going from pistol to machine gun would be an obvious upgrade- but also, have available things like silencers, grenade-launcher attachments. Would you like a bullet proof vest, or camoflage? There could be jetpacks, vehicles, devices for breathing under water, implants to allow your character to move faster, goggles for night vision, radar, long-range cruise missile launchers vs short range grenade launchers, and so on.
Items like these give both verticle and horizontal changes to a character, because they provide both asthetic differences, and some amount of leverage/advantage in mechanical gameplay. With so many items, it really becomes a matter of style. If you've played Call of Duty 4, they've done this very well. There are elements of both horizontal AND verticle choices.
To give a few examples of fantasy-based items that work like this: Sheilds, nets, various weapons/armor, a ring that makes you invisible (like lord of the rings :P ), magical scrolls, potions/poisons, runes, etc.
If you've played world of warcraft, their equipment system is kind of like a puzzle-game in and of itself. If you're off to fight onyxia, you'll want all your fire-resist gear on, and so on. You could have a system like that where if you're off to take on challenge X, then night vision and stealth might be the best way, or you'll need people to tank in the front and long-range people with high damage in the back. With a skill-less, level-less, class-less sytem, then equipment would be the only way. Furthermore, switching your playstyle from the stealth approach to the tank approach would simply be a matter of whether or not you have the proper equipment.
An equipment-based system is capable in terms of providing both horizontal AND verticle change, however it does have features that are totally different from a typical skill, or level, or class-based system.
For example player A, who has gathered many items, can go to player B, and right at the onset, player B can have the item of massive destruction. But I don't really see that as an inherritnly bad thing. I see that as freedom.
This brings the question : How do players get the equipment in the first place?- this is the part that I haven't got a perfect answer to. I was thinking that every player would be given a basic "crafter" item, that takes raw resources, or capital goods, and produces starter items from those goods. Basically giving the player the ability to start crafting something towards their playstyle. Don't let that item produce every other item in the game! Make it so that you have to "tech up" kind of like how there are "tech levels" in most Real-Time-Strategy games, such as warcraft and command and conquer.
I didn't originally come here to debate whether or not this system was feasible, but I do enjoy the debate. It's forced me to refine my position on all of this and get a clearer picture of what it is that I'm asking for. Anyways, it doesn't look like there's any mmog or rpg that is truely skill-less/class-less/level-less, so I guess I'll have to just wait, or program one myself! Cheers
I agree so totally and completely and have been trying to push this point for a while now.
You can give players more "power" and make them feel stronger and better without having to use levels and gear and other objectivelly measured numbers.
The biggest problem is vertical scaling. Level 1 has 100 health and does 10 damage and level 10 has 1000 health and does 100 damage. That kind of crap.
Give players "progression" by giving them options, tactical choices.
The new player has a simpe collection of skills, very basic, where as the advanced player has a more advanced set of skills. The new player still has a chance to defeat the advanced player, since they can do the same damage and have the same health points, but the advanced player has more options to buff/debuff bleed/trap/snare etc. etc. so they have more TACTICAL abilities.
Then you can use special item sets and gear rewards for completing cool content that are purely asthetic, because players really just want to look cool and feel powerful in the end, and throw in an achievement system that does nothing for the player but give them special Titles and a rap sheet of their accomplishments and you've got enough progress for a LOT of people, without all the BS.
Heerobya and Interesting, this is basically what I'm after too (although I'd prefer some learning curve in the form of skill gain). I think maybe we all have our own specific view of how you do this, and I'd be interested in some examples from each of you, if you please.
Once upon a time....
In order for combat in a MMO, be it fantasy or sci fi or whatever, to NOT be about numerical differences created through disparity between statistics... i.e. better gear and higher levels mean bigger numbers more power more health etc. or as I like to call it "numerical inflation."
W/O being "twitch" based, which has had very mixed and not-so-encouraging results whenever it's been tried in a MMO...
It has to be about strategy and timing.
Knowing what ability or skill to use, and when to use it, instead of just knowing which ability does the most damage or prevents the highest numerical value of damage.
Min/maxing your characters stats is not strategy or skill. It's mathematics and the ability to research.
What I propose for a system of horizontal character progression, that still relies on the principle of a basic learning curve to differentiate new players from veterans, AND allow for character advancement (a major staple of RPGs and MMORPGs)...
Is how I presented it earlier.
A new player starts with a few basic skills. Lets call them basic attack skill, basic defense skill, basic combo skill.
A veteran player has these same skills, at the same level of power/damage/defense as the new player, but they also have buff/debuff skills, movement imparing/enhanceing skills, dots and bleeds, snares and roots...
The two players, noob and veteran, could stand toe to toe and it'd be an even match. But the veteran player has a lot of tools in his/her arsenal that the noob does not, and thus can swing the fight in their favor through proper strategy and timing.
So as you use your weapons and skills, you gain new skills to use, not more powerful ones. You gain more variety, more breadth of abilities added to your arsenal... you upgrade the tool set not the tools.
If you think about it, what changes as you advance in PvE in most MMO games? Do the mobs/npcs you fight gain more abilities and start using more advanced strategies against you? Not really. What normally happens is instead of having 500 health and doing 100 damage they have 5,000 health and do 1,000 damage.
But since you, the player, are also advancing... you also have more health and do more damage. Nothing has actually changed between the encounters in the beginning of the game and those later on then the number of digits.
Imagine PvP where it's not about who has the biggest and baddest sword, but PvP about who has the best strategy, who has the fastest reaction time and knows how to use their abilities the best? Everything has a counter and a counter counter and a counter to that counter counter. PvP becomes a chess match played at the speed of light with opponents truly dueling, probing each others weaknesses and maneuvering into position for the kill.
Nowadays? Generally the person with the best gear and/or highest level will win 99% of the time. Linear, vertical numerical inflation. Advancement based soley on increasing the digit count.
Imagine PvE where you face more challenging creatures or groups/entire armies of creatures... where your wit and your teamwork and your skill determine victory, not how many +damage modifiers you have stacked on your toon.
It can be done. Mobs/NPCs in games already use abilities, have different behavior including group dynamics and using range and responding differently to player driven stimulus. It's still just scripts and if/then statements, it doesn't require any super advanced AI or insane processing power, just some thought on the developers part how to make every encounter more interesting.
They already do it with boss encounters in most raid-centric games, and they HAVE gotten better in recent years with mobs/npcs that use different tactics on players other then "run up and smack" or "sit and shoot/cast."
Throw in things like collision detection (used in many games) and line of site (used in most games) and you can use real strategy and tactics to defeat complex, challenging PvE and PvP encounters.. instead of just stacking numbers and maxing out your stats.
Horizontal advancement. True increases in difficulty and challenge. All possible.
How about Call of Duty 4 or maybe Battlefield 2/2142/Bad Company. You can at least unlock new weapons here.
In order for combat in a MMO, be it fantasy or sci fi or whatever, to NOT be about numerical differences created through disparity between statistics... i.e. better gear and higher levels mean bigger numbers more power more health etc. or as I like to call it "numerical inflation."
W/O being "twitch" based, which has had very mixed and not-so-encouraging results whenever it's been tried in a MMO...
It has to be about strategy and timing.
Knowing what ability or skill to use, and when to use it, instead of just knowing which ability does the most damage or prevents the highest numerical value of damage.
Min/maxing your characters stats is not strategy or skill. It's mathematics and the ability to research.
What I propose for a system of horizontal character progression, that still relies on the principle of a basic learning curve to differentiate new players from veterans, AND allow for character advancement (a major staple of RPGs and MMORPGs)...
Is how I presented it earlier.
A new player starts with a few basic skills. Lets call them basic attack skill, basic defense skill, basic combo skill.
A veteran player has these same skills, at the same level of power/damage/defense as the new player, but they also have buff/debuff skills, movement imparing/enhanceing skills, dots and bleeds, snares and roots...
The two players, noob and veteran, could stand toe to toe and it'd be an even match. But the veteran player has a lot of tools in his/her arsenal that the noob does not, and thus can swing the fight in their favor through proper strategy and timing.
So as you use your weapons and skills, you gain new skills to use, not more powerful ones. You gain more variety, more breadth of abilities added to your arsenal... you upgrade the tool set not the tools.
The problem is that the abilities act as Power Multiplyers.
eg:
In a fight player A and B can do 10 damage per sec (10 DPS), during 10 sec they will each do 100 damage. however, If player A has a stun ability that stops player B from attacking fro 5sec then player A now does 100 damage and player B 50 damage.
So if the fight lasts 10 sec then the Effective Power level of player A is twice that of Player B. Of course the longer the fight is and the longer the cooldown on the stun is the less of an effect it will have on the outcome.
There is a reason why players in WoW hate the rogue's StunLock ore the warlocks chain fears.
That won't be very fun game unless they got something fun to replace it, an rpg stands for role-playing, and you do need class to display your character's abilities, you do need skill to improve your abilities, leveling up just show how powerful you are and how many low levels might think "I want to get that piece of awesome weapon and armor!". However, leveling is not very nessassery to be used but most mmorpg just place it there for status and let people know who to face and what not to in an easy way.
Reading comments such as the poster above made me remember why I usually dont bother repplying or interacting with people. Its like a never ending affair, like for every hydra head you remove, many more are born from where the last one fell. Or the topic about defining MMO, if I stop or continue, it doesnt make a difference, the next week there will be more people to school.
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs are about vertical character progression?
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs have to have classes, levels and skills?
Thats why current MMOs suck and will continue to suck, because people are so ignorant and have no idea what its been shoved down their throats.
Is a nightmare, for every head, another seven rise up...
A skill-less, class-less, level-less game could exist, but it would either be purely gear-based, or predominantly playerskill-based.
Games which are predominantly about player skill might more closely resemble another genre entirely, but they might still be MMORPGs at their core (example: if Guild Wars had no stats or classes, but instead you were just a class-less avatar who collected Abilities, and you equipped a limited number of your collected Abilities to use in combat.)
Games which are purely gear-based would be unique and you could probably get reasonable progression out of it. Basically all the effort normally spread between level, gear, and stats progression would be concentrated purely on making gear progression especially deep and interesting.
The more you stray from being an RPG, the better these ideas seem. Trying to cling to RPG progression and ditching skills, classes, and levels will introduce some unique problems your game would have to solve to keep things fun.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Reading comments such as the poster above made me remember why I usually dont bother repplying or interacting with people. Its like a never ending affair, like for every hydra head you remove, many more are born from where the last one fell. Or the topic about defining MMO, if I stop or continue, it doesnt make a difference, the next week there will be more people to school.
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs are about vertical character progression?
Where the f*ck people learned that RPGs have to have classes, levels and skills?
Thats why current MMOs suck and will continue to suck, because people are so ignorant and have no idea what its been shoved down their throats.
Is a nightmare, for every head, another seven rise up...
Try playing Magic:TG or old school D&D and you would be surprised what elements it has. And don't tell me you do, because then you would not make this comment.
Mentioning D&D and Magic the Gathering... What a fool.
LOL.
Just because D&D has skills, levels or classes doesnt mean RPGs have to have it. Reducing/Stereotyping RPG to D&D is fail. Even more fail is mentioning Magic the Gathering in the same sentence, now that is utter fail.
Seriously kid, stop embarassing yourself. Good God.
I just read the title... You should name it ''snails online: Infinite road of destiny''. Lots of fun garantee.
-------------------------------------
Before: developers loved games and made money.
Now: developers love money and make games.
Yes of course, stereotyping rpgs to contain something that's in every rpg...
Every console RPG with a few notable exceptions (fallout, elder scrolls to name a couple) contain levels
In those games that do NOT, skills are used as an alternate form of progression.
Every game has classes. Let me tell you. Even the much-touted EvE does. People decide on a role, then arrange their stats/skills/whatever to accomplish that role. That, sir, is what a class is. A rose by any other name is still the same flower.
Sigh. Look, I understand you're wanting to think outside the box. In fact I applaud it. Now, can the vitriol and explain to me how you want a character driven role playing game to allow players to develop beyond whatever they start with without the above items. And I don't mean that it can't be done. I want you to tell me what you want to see in an MMO that allows progression of a character without those items.
Or, you're suggesting an MMO without progression. Essentially, counterstrike.
While it still has skills of a sort, I think the closest thing to this would be EVE Online. In EVE, you can improve any skill that you want at any time, if you first obtain the skill book to gain the 1st level, and are willing to take the time to learn the skill. The higher the skill ranks, the longer it takes to learn.
I could see something like this being in place for just about any game out there. You've got a great concept here, and if you find something that fits what your thinking, please let me know, as I would be interested in playing it.
If the game has no skills or levels, it really would be an RPG as it lacks one of the huge cornerstones, character development. You would, at that point, have an action game.
Otherwise, that makes every game that exists an RPG, being you remove the real defining factor, character development. Gear is not character development. You're not developing the character, only what he uses.
In short, no, no RPG exists like this, because if it did, it would not be an RPG. There are plenty of acion, adventure, racing, and shooting titles for you to choose from.
I just got to read some of the later comments about where people have learned RPGs need to have character progression. Because, if not it's not an RPG. Games do need some definition. Now, let me point something out:
An RPG game has:
Story
Action
Character Progession/Development
Usually a fairly large map
Lore
Memorable Characters (hopefully)
Exploration
Usually takes place in open ended enviorments
Largely 3rd person, popular 1st titles exist.
An Action/Adventure game has:
Story
Action
Smaller maps
Lore
Memorable Characters (Jak & Daxter? Ratchet & Clank?)
Exlporation
Third person for the most part
Usually has pigeonholed gameplay.
An FPS has:
Story
Action
Maps of all sizes, from the largest to the smallest
Lore
Memorable Characters (BioShock anyone?)
Exploration
First person perspective
Gameplay can be open-ended or fairly pigeonholed.
What is the defining charateristic between them? RPGs have strong character progression. if you remove that, it's an Action/Adventure delivered slightly differently.
____________________________
Telthalion Rohircil - Guardian - Elemandir - Lord of The Rings Online
---
== RIP == Torey - Commando - Orion - Tabula Rasa == RIP ==
---
Jordaniel Torey - Navy Megathron, Active Armor Tank - Tranquility - EVE Online
---
Torey Scott - Rifleman - Fallen Earth
____________________________
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein
What is an mmorpg without it's class, levels, and skills? is it just borderline Role-Play? Socialazation? what is it really? Darkfall Online has a level-less game and more concentrated on skills, yes? look how it turned out. How can you make a game that contains non skills, no level, and no class?
It's just how you define MMO. I play games without levels which are MMO (read my post in this same thread) and they work fine.
You don't need levels or classes to have an "MMO" experience. The "RPG" part can be taken rather loosely imo, it doesn't need to be fantasy, you can be a warrior, or a construction worker or space marine, as long as you are somehwat connected to your character by a story and feel part of the world, giving it an RPG tag is fine imo.
MMORPG will evolve into MMO I think, the 'big' MMORPG companies are trying to hold this back though. Bioware, SoE, Blizzard, NCSoft would love to just continue on the same road and bring out MMORPG after MMORPG LEVEL TREADMILL , because it's easy, makes easy money and doesn't require any new type of gameplay. But it doesn't mean that all games should have levels and skill, because enough games have proven that's not the case.