Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
The why is pretty simple, it's because there is a generation and a half that only knows finite (and preset) goals. Achievement is a major motivator and for people who really don't know how to "make their own fun" or set their own goals, this style is infinitely important. Levels play into this perfectly, and were carried over because they are easier than almost any other system. It's an easy to understand concept for players and it's easy to work with.
This is not a "kids these days" problem.
Otherwise why can we look back through thousands of years of gaming and see Chess, Go, Soccer, and other games which are bound by rules and goals. Rules and goals are intrinsic to what makes games fun.
People enjoy other activities too, but "games" often isn't the right word to describe them. "Toys" works for some of them (sandbox-like stuff.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
So... a game... with no goal. Kinda like "run around this field and kick the ball wherever you want, though there's no goals to kick it into. Just kick it and have fun." Not seeing the appeal.
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
So... a game... with no goal. Kinda like "run around this field and kick the ball wherever you want, though there's no goals to kick it into. Just kick it and have fun." Not seeing the appeal.
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
They have goals, just like every single player game. As for no progression, it would die.
To me? Probably not. I wouldn't even THINK of playing a game without progression. It would be 100% pointless to me.
Without Progression? No With easy progression in the areas people want? yes.WoW is prove this true,Guild Wars is prove this is true.DDO is proving this true.They are subset games who want to skip certian parts of mmos
What if they made MMO where you had a max level character then let you do what you want to do, basically this what if WoW reset all their servers then gave everybody the option having a level 80, made all the content level 80 and items level 80 and add in some random dungeons like diablo.
How would you progress?
1.Collection of Armor and items with different stats
2.Achivement and awards
3.PvP progression levels and Raid progression level
The flaw is people will go through the content quickly and some people like to feel like the in virtual world but reality half of the people rush to games to make to the end game anyway so is the real difference.What if you made a game that just WoW raiding end game and WoW battle grounds and arenas and Warhammer RvR end game with some random diablo dungeons would people play it?
They are true RPG players who love building their character level by level and explore a seemless virtual world and then they are the new school rpg players who just want to do cool stuff and rush through the content the type of people who WoW LFG and new dungeon system is aim at or type of people who love that guild wars gave you max level character for pvp.
I don't think you could make game without progression,I do think you can make game a without vertical progression.
Of course it is possible to get rid of all the "hardcoded" progression, like levels, skills, stats etc.
Instead the progression would move to gathering/building. For instance, you have to gather materials to build a house, or gather materials to sell to get money to buy a sword (that another player made to make HIS money so he could buy an armor).
In such a system, the strength of the character would move from skills/stats to equipment, as the effort would shift to getting the equipment.
Another thing you could do to make "natural" progression, is to make the actual player skill matter. A player who picks up a bow will have to practice his r/l skills to become good at it, and with his practice he will beat a new player that picked up a bow, even when the two characters are equally strong (ie. you could beat him as easily if you swapped chars with him). Such a system would require, that it takes alot of practice to be good in different areas. It would have to be challenging to shoot a bow and hit something. That way you will have switched the progression from skills/stats/levels towards r/l skill.
Putting together the optimal equipment to solve a task is also something that could take practice.
I don't think it would be easy to make such a game, however. The mechanics have to be challenging, hard to master and fun to attract and keep players. It would be very hard to make basic mechanics that would in this way challenge the player's r/l skills, that he would want to keep practicing, and not get boring from repetition.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
The why is pretty simple, it's because there is a generation and a half that only knows finite (and preset) goals. Achievement is a major motivator and for people who really don't know how to "make their own fun" or set their own goals, this style is infinitely important. Levels play into this perfectly, and were carried over because they are easier than almost any other system. It's an easy to understand concept for players and it's easy to work with.
I am disappointed with that reply. Not because I find any fault with it, rather because it unfortunately seems a very accurate explanation of why.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
So... a game... with no goal. Kinda like "run around this field and kick the ball wherever you want, though there's no goals to kick it into. Just kick it and have fun." Not seeing the appeal.
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
Not what I am saying at all. Fallout 3 and EVE Online have thousands upon thousands of coded finite goals. Players of both games work towards short-term milestones as they play, but they are not playing specifically to reach the end of the game.A WOW player plays to reach level 60 to wait for an expansion to reach level 70 to wait for an expansion to reach level 80 to wait for an expansion.... The very first goal of most MMO gamers when they get their new expansion is to start leveling to cap again.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Long time reader of these forums, first time poster.
I think an MMO without level progression is completely viable, and here's how I would do it. (Just off the top of my head..)
Let's take a fighter class for instance, you could make the players character advancement based upon a rank system within a guild . i.e You build your reputation by doing quests. They may send you on a caravan escort, or carry messages to other members in other cities etc.. This allows for both meaningful quests which promote advancement and an opportunity to seek out other party members who may also have to travel to the same place. (Safety in numbers ofc!)
Quests don't have to come from a guild, you could find work on a notice board in a tavern, offering gold for small services.. or perhaps you may pick up rumours here which lead to possible dungeons or scenarios.
As for skill advancement, well, you could learn them through quests which require you to seek out trainers who would teach specific or unique attacks for something in return. (Another opportunity to insert quests) Or they could be learned from guild members once you reach a specific rank ( gained through questing again). Or they could simply be bought.
I'd make the players personal equipment a major factor of the game..This is what I believe motivates players in most MMO's anyway, but just make gear a little harder to get. This way not everyone looks the same and everyone has something to work towards. Crafters could design UNIQUE armour for a little extra gold, this way you could make crafting skills sought after, and therefore a worthwhile occupation.
Other players could just look at what you are wearing to see that you must be proficient at what you do. ( Or perhaps class titles could be given to show how experienced a particular class is?)
Also, I would make non-fighter classes exactly that. Although they would be able to fight, it seems all classes are all about how effective they are in combat these days. Make dungeons/raids dependant on different class skills. i.e Thieves are needed to search for traps, pick locks, scout etc.
We need to slow things down a bit. In a level based game, people are racing to get to end game only to find it's exactly the same but with higher numbers, therefore I say build a game which is centered around the community. Give the players a reason to interact - not PUG's that last 5 minutes during which no-one speaks- but through meaningful questing and mutual dependance on one anothers skills.
With skills rather than level being the major factor for a successful group, a player could hire a young thief for his skills only, and maybe not a share of dungeon loot. This will offer players of differing experience a reason to group. (Of course, a Master thief would be necessary for more difficult situations)
I know making a successful MMO depends on a host of other ingredients, and I believe developers are limited to what they can do because of the risk involved in breaking the mould. But for goodness sake, just look at all the MMO's that have crashed and burned these past few years.
Anyway, thanks for reading, (if you made it this far..) and like I say, these are just rough ideas and of course are just some things I'd like to see if it were MY MMO.
I haven't played it but does WWIIO have much character progression? While it may not be considered a RPG, it is still an MMO. Progression comes from moving the frontlines.
So... a game... with no goal. Kinda like "run around this field and kick the ball wherever you want, though there's no goals to kick it into. Just kick it and have fun." Not seeing the appeal.
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
Not what I am saying at all. Fallout 3 and EVE Online have thousands upon thousands of coded finite goals. Players of both games work towards short-term milestones as they play, but they are not playing specifically to reach the end of the game.A WOW player plays to reach level 60 to wait for an expansion to reach level 70 to wait for an expansion to reach level 80 to wait for an expansion.... The very first goal of most MMO gamers when they get their new expansion is to start leveling to cap again.
Bah hambug.
You generalized WoW' gameplay so much that you missed all other other stuff that happens in the game. If I were to treat EVE that way I could say that all EVE is about is minint asteroids till you have the ISK to buy a good ship and then blowing up other players. Then you repeat that till CPP comes up with an expansion so you can blow up other players in new ways.
EVE has its own 'end game' and many players will gladly skip the rest of the content to jump into it as soon as they can.
EVE and Fallout 3 are just as much progression based as WoW is.
This is why developers are stuck in a rut when it comes to delivering new innovative MMOs. When players can wrap their heads around other means of character development that are just as fulfilling, we can get back to deep, rich MMO worlds.
It's like being a movie critic and only being able to review action movies because those are the only ones being made/making money. Sad indeed.
PS: Second Life is FULL of progression, so it's not a game that's making it w/o progression.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Well, an RPG just entails playing a role. It doesn't technically have anything to do with combat or progression, though those have been staples in most RPGs since Dungeons and Dragons tabletop days. As to whether it can be successful, I think it can, but I haven't really heard of any even being made other than Second Life. It just depends on the type of things players are going to be doing, and the target audience, I suppose.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
well, what would a typical play session look like?
if you can answer that question and the answer makes sense...then it'd be possible.
A MMORPG, without Grinding
and without End Game
Freely open, where it has no Levels of any kind.
Just a Open World, where you can do anything from the start.
That seems to fit into the No Progression catagory
Please try to refrain from thinking a Bartle system MMO (one that balances all 4 type equally) does not equal progression. ALL MMOs thrive on progression. This is the entire point of playing a MMORPG to begin with. What you are describing is nothing more than a sandbox MMO.
We don't want MMOs with no progression, we want MMOs with 3 more meaningful ways of progression other than Killer/Club systems aka combat driven MMOs.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Levels 1-79 in WoW are simply tutorial levels where you learn how to play your toon. The game actually starts at 80 now. There is still progression at 80, i'm thinking of gear.
That's a little overgeneralized. I don't play WoW like that.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
As someone already stated. This already exists: Second Life (and I'll add PlayStation Home). These are technically MMOs and they do fit your definition of what you are looking for.
As far as an MMORPG with what you are looking for; Personally I don't think it will happen. A part of the challenge and fun in MMOs in the progression. The journey from point A to point B is what makes the game fun and enjoyable. If there is not journey and you could walk up to the biggest baddest boss in the game, take 4 chops, and he dies ... I don't know about you, but I would find that very fun. What levels do in an MMO is spreads thin the player base so that not everyone is going to do the same content at the same time. I don't know personally I wouldn't play a game that would have no progression what so ever just because there in lays the fun and the challenge for me.
Levels 1-79 in WoW are simply tutorial levels where you learn how to play your toon. The game actually starts at 80 now. There is still progression at 80, i'm thinking of gear.
That's a little overgeneralized. I don't play WoW like that.
I don't play any game like that until around the third alt. I like to do the dungeons at the proper level with a proper level group. Not get rushed through with someone's max level alt too.
As someone already stated. This already exists: Second Life (and I'll add PlayStation Home). These are technically MMOs and they do fit your definition of what you are looking for. As far as an MMORPG with what you are looking for; Personally I don't think it will happen. A part of the challenge and fun in MMOs in the progression. The journey from point A to point B is what makes the game fun and enjoyable. If there is not journey and you could walk up to the biggest baddest boss in the game, take 4 chops, and he dies ... I don't know about you, but I would find that very fun. What levels do in an MMO is spreads thin the player base so that not everyone is going to do the same content at the same time. I don't know personally I wouldn't play a game that would have no progression what so ever just because there in lays the fun and the challenge for me.
Second Life is a MMO Social game, not RPG.
As I mentioned mmorpg without progression is more or less MMO Social games in today's standard. You can have no progression in single player rpg but when it goes to MMO all aspects become social.
Traditionally computer rpg's have been all about progression, while pen and paper rpg's have had ones with a purely storytelling perspective. The computer games that resemble rpg's but don't have progression as their modus operandi usually fall into other game categories.
Traditionally computer rpg's have been all about progression, while pen and paper rpg's have had ones with a purely storytelling perspective. The computer games that resemble rpg's but don't have progression as their modus operandi usually fall into other game categories.
Not exactly. Ultima IV (the Series) is not based on character progression. All your fighting, leveling, etc have almost no implication in your role of becoming The Avatar.
I'd be interested in playing a non-progression MMO. Problem with the current model-- they're all geared towards satisfying 'achievers' (aka loot lovers).
Now whether or not it's marketable? Well thats a tough question. Without the carrots what will keep people paying $15 a month?
This is why I've been thinking lately we'll never see much progression in MMOs until they evolve beyond monthly subscription.
I'd say the only major innovation we probably seen towards the topic is Guild Wars (allows you to make a max level avatar). So my estimate / theory is that we wont see much innovation til we get away from the subscription payment model
The key is- whether correct or not- gamers want something to show for their time investment. This is why LEvels and gear has worked so well
Traditionally computer rpg's have been all about progression, while pen and paper rpg's have had ones with a purely storytelling perspective. The computer games that resemble rpg's but don't have progression as their modus operandi usually fall into other game categories.
Not exactly. Ultima IV (the Series) is not based on character progression. All your fighting, leveling, etc have almost no implication in your role of becoming The Avatar.
While you didn't have to progress in levels (although you would never beat the final dungeon without them) you definitely needed to progress in purity to become the avatar. One mistake in talking to people could set you back 50% of your humility stat.
Every GAME has progression. Every activity has progression. Movies progress. Books progress. Life progresses and you can't stop it. . Without it, you're just standing still spinning in a circle. You can do that in your bedroom. You should do that;)
There is no point doing something thats supposed to be entertaining unless you get better at whatever your'e doing or following a path to some sort of conclusion. If I'm going to make something or build something and its not tangible, whats the point? Second Life just isn't a game in any traditional sense and it certainly isn't filled with people looking for fun exactly. Its mostly lonely people with no lives accomplishing things virtually they're not capable of in the real world...hence the name Second Life.
To me the original promise of MMORPGs has been the creation of virtual worlds - where you can be an adventurer, but also a crafter, an explorer etc. You know, just picking your role and doing it - without leveling up some skill, but rather improving by learning the game mechanics, finding items, materials etc. I guess that idea has been thrown out of the window when developers realized that most people need the 'carrot on a stick' and preferrably minimal player interaction to be able to enjoy a game.
And that kind of game needs a clear path of progression, otherwise people wouldn't know what to do. The kind of mechanics and tools you would have to put into place for a progression-less game to have any broader appeal would require some serious developer skill (+ time, which equals money, which doesn't go well with niche-markets). So again, I can theoretically see it work, but don't expect that any developer would take that kind of risk.
Comments
The why is pretty simple, it's because there is a generation and a half that only knows finite (and preset) goals. Achievement is a major motivator and for people who really don't know how to "make their own fun" or set their own goals, this style is infinitely important. Levels play into this perfectly, and were carried over because they are easier than almost any other system. It's an easy to understand concept for players and it's easy to work with.
This is not a "kids these days" problem.
Otherwise why can we look back through thousands of years of gaming and see Chess, Go, Soccer, and other games which are bound by rules and goals. Rules and goals are intrinsic to what makes games fun.
People enjoy other activities too, but "games" often isn't the right word to describe them. "Toys" works for some of them (sandbox-like stuff.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
To me? Probably not. I wouldn't even THINK of playing a game without progression. It would be 100% pointless to me.
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
They have goals, just like every single player game. As for no progression, it would die.
To me? Probably not. I wouldn't even THINK of playing a game without progression. It would be 100% pointless to me.
Without Progression? No With easy progression in the areas people want? yes.WoW is prove this true,Guild Wars is prove this is true.DDO is proving this true.They are subset games who want to skip certian parts of mmos
What if they made MMO where you had a max level character then let you do what you want to do, basically this what if WoW reset all their servers then gave everybody the option having a level 80, made all the content level 80 and items level 80 and add in some random dungeons like diablo.
How would you progress?
1.Collection of Armor and items with different stats
2.Achivement and awards
3.PvP progression levels and Raid progression level
The flaw is people will go through the content quickly and some people like to feel like the in virtual world but reality half of the people rush to games to make to the end game anyway so is the real difference.What if you made a game that just WoW raiding end game and WoW battle grounds and arenas and Warhammer RvR end game with some random diablo dungeons would people play it?
They are true RPG players who love building their character level by level and explore a seemless virtual world and then they are the new school rpg players who just want to do cool stuff and rush through the content the type of people who WoW LFG and new dungeon system is aim at or type of people who love that guild wars gave you max level character for pvp.
I don't think you could make game without progression,I do think you can make game a without vertical progression.
Of course it is possible to get rid of all the "hardcoded" progression, like levels, skills, stats etc.
Instead the progression would move to gathering/building. For instance, you have to gather materials to build a house, or gather materials to sell to get money to buy a sword (that another player made to make HIS money so he could buy an armor).
In such a system, the strength of the character would move from skills/stats to equipment, as the effort would shift to getting the equipment.
Another thing you could do to make "natural" progression, is to make the actual player skill matter. A player who picks up a bow will have to practice his r/l skills to become good at it, and with his practice he will beat a new player that picked up a bow, even when the two characters are equally strong (ie. you could beat him as easily if you swapped chars with him). Such a system would require, that it takes alot of practice to be good in different areas. It would have to be challenging to shoot a bow and hit something. That way you will have switched the progression from skills/stats/levels towards r/l skill.
Putting together the optimal equipment to solve a task is also something that could take practice.
I don't think it would be easy to make such a game, however. The mechanics have to be challenging, hard to master and fun to attract and keep players. It would be very hard to make basic mechanics that would in this way challenge the player's r/l skills, that he would want to keep practicing, and not get boring from repetition.
The why is pretty simple, it's because there is a generation and a half that only knows finite (and preset) goals. Achievement is a major motivator and for people who really don't know how to "make their own fun" or set their own goals, this style is infinitely important. Levels play into this perfectly, and were carried over because they are easier than almost any other system. It's an easy to understand concept for players and it's easy to work with.
I am disappointed with that reply. Not because I find any fault with it, rather because it unfortunately seems a very accurate explanation of why.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
Not what I am saying at all. Fallout 3 and EVE Online have thousands upon thousands of coded finite goals. Players of both games work towards short-term milestones as they play, but they are not playing specifically to reach the end of the game.A WOW player plays to reach level 60 to wait for an expansion to reach level 70 to wait for an expansion to reach level 80 to wait for an expansion.... The very first goal of most MMO gamers when they get their new expansion is to start leveling to cap again.
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Hello all,
Long time reader of these forums, first time poster.
I think an MMO without level progression is completely viable, and here's how I would do it. (Just off the top of my head..)
Let's take a fighter class for instance, you could make the players character advancement based upon a rank system within a guild . i.e You build your reputation by doing quests. They may send you on a caravan escort, or carry messages to other members in other cities etc.. This allows for both meaningful quests which promote advancement and an opportunity to seek out other party members who may also have to travel to the same place. (Safety in numbers ofc!)
Quests don't have to come from a guild, you could find work on a notice board in a tavern, offering gold for small services.. or perhaps you may pick up rumours here which lead to possible dungeons or scenarios.
As for skill advancement, well, you could learn them through quests which require you to seek out trainers who would teach specific or unique attacks for something in return. (Another opportunity to insert quests) Or they could be learned from guild members once you reach a specific rank ( gained through questing again). Or they could simply be bought.
I'd make the players personal equipment a major factor of the game..This is what I believe motivates players in most MMO's anyway, but just make gear a little harder to get. This way not everyone looks the same and everyone has something to work towards. Crafters could design UNIQUE armour for a little extra gold, this way you could make crafting skills sought after, and therefore a worthwhile occupation.
Other players could just look at what you are wearing to see that you must be proficient at what you do. ( Or perhaps class titles could be given to show how experienced a particular class is?)
Also, I would make non-fighter classes exactly that. Although they would be able to fight, it seems all classes are all about how effective they are in combat these days. Make dungeons/raids dependant on different class skills. i.e Thieves are needed to search for traps, pick locks, scout etc.
We need to slow things down a bit. In a level based game, people are racing to get to end game only to find it's exactly the same but with higher numbers, therefore I say build a game which is centered around the community. Give the players a reason to interact - not PUG's that last 5 minutes during which no-one speaks- but through meaningful questing and mutual dependance on one anothers skills.
With skills rather than level being the major factor for a successful group, a player could hire a young thief for his skills only, and maybe not a share of dungeon loot. This will offer players of differing experience a reason to group. (Of course, a Master thief would be necessary for more difficult situations)
I know making a successful MMO depends on a host of other ingredients, and I believe developers are limited to what they can do because of the risk involved in breaking the mould. But for goodness sake, just look at all the MMO's that have crashed and burned these past few years.
Anyway, thanks for reading, (if you made it this far..) and like I say, these are just rough ideas and of course are just some things I'd like to see if it were MY MMO.
Ubadai
Second Life doesn't have character progression
All other MMOs have character progression, eg, your character gets better as time progresses.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
I haven't played it but does WWIIO have much character progression? While it may not be considered a RPG, it is still an MMO. Progression comes from moving the frontlines.
You'd absolutely loathe Fallout 3 and EVE Online.
Why anyone would look for some finite goal - pretty much a way to 'beat' the game - in an MMO is beyond me. It's why levels are about the most ridiculous aspect of PnPs/MUDs carried over to MMORPGs.
So your saying Fallout 3 and Eve don't have any goals?
Not what I am saying at all. Fallout 3 and EVE Online have thousands upon thousands of coded finite goals. Players of both games work towards short-term milestones as they play, but they are not playing specifically to reach the end of the game.A WOW player plays to reach level 60 to wait for an expansion to reach level 70 to wait for an expansion to reach level 80 to wait for an expansion.... The very first goal of most MMO gamers when they get their new expansion is to start leveling to cap again.
Bah hambug.
You generalized WoW' gameplay so much that you missed all other other stuff that happens in the game. If I were to treat EVE that way I could say that all EVE is about is minint asteroids till you have the ISK to buy a good ship and then blowing up other players. Then you repeat that till CPP comes up with an expansion so you can blow up other players in new ways.
EVE has its own 'end game' and many players will gladly skip the rest of the content to jump into it as soon as they can.
EVE and Fallout 3 are just as much progression based as WoW is.
Progression =/= combat only
This is why developers are stuck in a rut when it comes to delivering new innovative MMOs. When players can wrap their heads around other means of character development that are just as fulfilling, we can get back to deep, rich MMO worlds.
It's like being a movie critic and only being able to review action movies because those are the only ones being made/making money. Sad indeed.
PS: Second Life is FULL of progression, so it's not a game that's making it w/o progression.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
Well, an RPG just entails playing a role. It doesn't technically have anything to do with combat or progression, though those have been staples in most RPGs since Dungeons and Dragons tabletop days. As to whether it can be successful, I think it can, but I haven't really heard of any even being made other than Second Life. It just depends on the type of things players are going to be doing, and the target audience, I suppose.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
A MMORPG, without Grinding
and without End Game
Freely open, where it has no Levels of any kind.
Just a Open World, where you can do anything from the start.
That seems to fit into the No Progression catagory
Please try to refrain from thinking a Bartle system MMO (one that balances all 4 type equally) does not equal progression. ALL MMOs thrive on progression. This is the entire point of playing a MMORPG to begin with. What you are describing is nothing more than a sandbox MMO.
We don't want MMOs with no progression, we want MMOs with 3 more meaningful ways of progression other than Killer/Club systems aka combat driven MMOs.
"Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."
That's a little overgeneralized. I don't play WoW like that.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
As someone already stated. This already exists: Second Life (and I'll add PlayStation Home). These are technically MMOs and they do fit your definition of what you are looking for.
As far as an MMORPG with what you are looking for; Personally I don't think it will happen. A part of the challenge and fun in MMOs in the progression. The journey from point A to point B is what makes the game fun and enjoyable. If there is not journey and you could walk up to the biggest baddest boss in the game, take 4 chops, and he dies ... I don't know about you, but I would find that very fun. What levels do in an MMO is spreads thin the player base so that not everyone is going to do the same content at the same time. I don't know personally I wouldn't play a game that would have no progression what so ever just because there in lays the fun and the challenge for me.
That's a little overgeneralized. I don't play WoW like that.
I don't play any game like that until around the third alt. I like to do the dungeons at the proper level with a proper level group. Not get rushed through with someone's max level alt too.
Second Life is a MMO Social game, not RPG.
As I mentioned mmorpg without progression is more or less MMO Social games in today's standard. You can have no progression in single player rpg but when it goes to MMO all aspects become social.
Traditionally computer rpg's have been all about progression, while pen and paper rpg's have had ones with a purely storytelling perspective. The computer games that resemble rpg's but don't have progression as their modus operandi usually fall into other game categories.
Not exactly. Ultima IV (the Series) is not based on character progression. All your fighting, leveling, etc have almost no implication in your role of becoming The Avatar.
I'd be interested in playing a non-progression MMO. Problem with the current model-- they're all geared towards satisfying 'achievers' (aka loot lovers).
Now whether or not it's marketable? Well thats a tough question. Without the carrots what will keep people paying $15 a month?
This is why I've been thinking lately we'll never see much progression in MMOs until they evolve beyond monthly subscription.
I'd say the only major innovation we probably seen towards the topic is Guild Wars (allows you to make a max level avatar). So my estimate / theory is that we wont see much innovation til we get away from the subscription payment model
The key is- whether correct or not- gamers want something to show for their time investment. This is why LEvels and gear has worked so well
Not exactly. Ultima IV (the Series) is not based on character progression. All your fighting, leveling, etc have almost no implication in your role of becoming The Avatar.
While you didn't have to progress in levels (although you would never beat the final dungeon without them) you definitely needed to progress in purity to become the avatar. One mistake in talking to people could set you back 50% of your humility stat.
Every GAME has progression. Every activity has progression. Movies progress. Books progress. Life progresses and you can't stop it. . Without it, you're just standing still spinning in a circle. You can do that in your bedroom. You should do that;)
There is no point doing something thats supposed to be entertaining unless you get better at whatever your'e doing or following a path to some sort of conclusion. If I'm going to make something or build something and its not tangible, whats the point? Second Life just isn't a game in any traditional sense and it certainly isn't filled with people looking for fun exactly. Its mostly lonely people with no lives accomplishing things virtually they're not capable of in the real world...hence the name Second Life.
Possible? Yes
Likely to happen within the next decade? No
To me the original promise of MMORPGs has been the creation of virtual worlds - where you can be an adventurer, but also a crafter, an explorer etc. You know, just picking your role and doing it - without leveling up some skill, but rather improving by learning the game mechanics, finding items, materials etc. I guess that idea has been thrown out of the window when developers realized that most people need the 'carrot on a stick' and preferrably minimal player interaction to be able to enjoy a game.
And that kind of game needs a clear path of progression, otherwise people wouldn't know what to do. The kind of mechanics and tools you would have to put into place for a progression-less game to have any broader appeal would require some serious developer skill (+ time, which equals money, which doesn't go well with niche-markets). So again, I can theoretically see it work, but don't expect that any developer would take that kind of risk.