Ive made a topic like this before. Levels are not necessary imho. There are much more creative ways to reward experience and progress other than a number stamped next to your avatar.
For the 1% of the people who claim they "enjoy the story" and are in "no rush to reach level cap", 99% race through all the dialog and view it as nothing more than a necessary grind.
Leveling is a waste of development time, a waste of player time and a waste of resources. Quests are fine, direction is fine...but levels are simply something to get through as quick as possible to me.
There have been a lot of ideas posted here with merit. I myself ended up on these Forums because of this very topic. I have a desire to play MMOs again, but I cannot handle the grind.
People who say it "can't be done" are being unimaginative and fueling the problem, but their points do still have merit. Leveling, being such a core design to these games, may be the key to this rumored "next gen" MMO we hear of so often. If someone can find a way to revamp the system, that may be the so-called next generation.
I for one do agree leveling has its uses. Nothing was quite as exciting as my first MMO experience, and I enjoyed the leveling. But therein lies also the problem: its only fun the first time. Once you have done it in one game, you no longer want to do it. Every new MMO we all utter the same words, "Here we go again."
A revamp of this system needs to cover TWO areas: First, it needs to address the veteran MMO players who tire of the same grind over and over. Second, it needs to remain friendly and interesting to new players who have yet to find leveling a chore. I refuse to believe that such a system could not be created. Developers have barely even tried. It remains an almost untried direction.
However, this gives rise to an obvious concern. What use is playing for a long time when you don't get any reward for your efforts? I would offer this counterpoint: What is the point of starting if you know you cannot do anything until you sink time into the game?
Progression is necessary. A system of Leveling, as we know it, is not. There are still numerous ways to offer people a sense of progression. Our huge mistake, and the problem with developers, is that we are too afraid to move outside the comfort zone and try something new. Leveling was the original way, we're used to it, and we haven't seen anything new that works. The bigger problem though, is that we haven't seen anything new at all.
Allow me to provide an example system, just off the top of my head.
Characters and monsters have Power Levels, but their stats are normalized. Example: A Lv. 1 Spider has 1000 HP. A Lv. 50 Spider has 1000 HP, and Your Character has 1000 HP. What then is the difference? A level difference will alter the effects of combat.
For example. If you are Power Level 1 and you attack a Power Level 1 Spider, you deal 100% normal damage to it, and it deals 100% normal damage to you. However, if you attack a Power Level 50 Spider, you deal 51% normal damage to it, and it deals 149% normal damage to you.
In addition, your theoretical Power Level could have account-wide effects. That way, if you start a new character, you will not be "back to square one". Perhaps if you have played previous games by the company, they could even give you this bonus automatically for being a veteran.
This is just a rough system, but it could be refined and polished. It's a new idea, and that is what we need: new ideas.
I am the Warrior. In order to kill, I must close with my enemy. I see their eyes. I smell their breath. I taste their fear.
For the 1% of the people who claim they "enjoy the story" and are in "no rush to reach level cap", 99% race through all the dialog and view it as nothing more than a necessary grind.
Leveling is a waste of development time, a waste of player time and a waste of resources. Quests are fine, direction is fine...but levels are simply something to get through as quick as possible to me.
Skill based advancement>level based advancement
I disagree for the reasons I stated prior Tux.
Not only that, lvling is your "learning curve". Getting to know the functionality of your character.
More so than that though, is what I stated prior....the mix/match stuff. If you are talking fixed skills is one thing.....when you got a SWG skill tree from different classes you create one boondagle of iterations that content must be balanced for.
So I suppose tf would depend on what you refer to as "skill based".
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Its already been done. Look at EvE. Its purely skill based and what skills you purchase. They are the only firm I can say have done this well and it works. e.g. a player 2 days old can go into a battle with dozens of players who have been playing for 5 years. They can still equip equipment that adds value in the battle.
I would love to see a fantasy MMO like EvE and missions would reward (besides loot / mats) skills that you can equip. So if ou want that fireball then you will need to do something pretty special. Not just hit next level and go 'bam! I know fireball'. That way a player who is firing fireballs, those around know they have completed that kick arse dungeon etc.
Fallen Earth has levels but its not really a level system at all. You buy your skills / buffs or earn them and distribute AP into some main skills. If they removed the level number then it wouldnt make any difference.
So it has been done, just not widely used. I figure paper based D&D set the trend of XP and levels.
Its already been done. Look at EvE. Its purely skill based and what skills you purchase. They are the only firm I can say have done this well and it works.
I make no difference between skill levels and character levels. They have the same effect only it is slightly harder to interpret. Missions are scaled for skill levels:
SP demand goes along the lines F < D < C < AS < BC < BS < HAC < SC < CS < M
And it bars content from the "low-level characters": You cannot do shit in majority of deadspace complexes or wormhole spaces of class 3 and onward with just a Battlecruiser.
Putting an artificial restriction and having instakill zones for the "lowbies" is the same thing for me. The former just tells it to me in advance. Why would I want to go in a zone/dungeon if I'd be killed in an instant and can't do shit?
Not to forget: You cannot join capital ship fleets unless you have a capital ship. Sure, there are other fleets you can join but isn't that the same as going for another lower level zone/dungeon?
Again, no difference.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Progression is necessary. You can do it with levels, or skills, that increase in power.
Scaling sucks.
A mouse then, is the same as a dragon.
A Jawa is the same as Darth Vader.
Because, you know, they scale.
I'm not sure if you are referring to my post when talking about scaling or the current MMO situation because essentially now a mouse is same as a dragon. In fact in some games a mouse is more powerful than a dragon because there might be a level 50 mouse where as a dragon might be merely level 10,
Levels exist but they are not utilized to give a sense of power, merely numerical progress. Your level 50 character facing a level 50 mouse is no more powerful than a level 1 character facing a level 1 mouse. It's still a mouse you are facing. Only now you have fancy looking armor and spells that should be slaying hundreds of mouses. Only they don't.
The only illusion of progress here is a numerical one: character level. For me it's not quite enough. For my sense of enjoyment I'd like the changes to be both visual and strategical. Mice should not have a place as serious enemies anyways but there are still your regular orcs, giant spiders, minotaurs and what not. Should these creatures be comparable in power to giants, dragons and other legendary creatures? More powerful than then?
I feel the answer is no and that's why I'd rather assign a "tier" or "difficulty level" to enemy based on how great of a threat it is. A level 1 spider is same as level 50 spider but a level 1 dragon is not same as level 1 spider - or even level 50 spider. A level 1 dragon would beat level 50 spider because essentially enemies would not have levels.
A level 1 spider and level 50 spider would not exist. There is merely a spider, and a dragon, and characters of different levels facing them. They would not even show levels. A dragon would be always more powerful than a spider. Only character level and their toolbox (skills, equipment, what not...) grows.
So in the system I'd like to see a Jawa is not same as a Darth Vader. A Jawa would be tier1 regular mook where as Darth Vader would be tier3 elite mob that requires a team. It just doesn't matter if that team is level 1 players or level 50 players other than level 50 players having slightly better chance to defeat DV as they have more tools (skills/abilities/equipment) to choose from - to give them situational advantages.
I'd like to repeat I can see various benefits from this:
no more spiders and regular mobs being stronger than dragons
you can face all content regardless of your level
no wasted design on areas that people won't revisit because without level gating all areas are available to all levels
no need to constantly replace your items as they don't scale to your level
However I'd like to see more opinions about levels. These are naturally just mine.
Levels are a misleading sense of progress. Yeah, you might advance in levels by doing quests and griding mobs, but in almost every MMO, the main focus is endgame. Hell, I don't play WoW, but didn't they do something where it makes leveling 1-60 really fast now? I feel like right when games with leveling systems come out, it usually takes people a while to hit max level because noone really knows yet how to do it. After the game has been out for a good amount of time, most people can hit max level in a month.
I hate to bring up SWG (Pre-CU) because I feel the topic has been beaten to death and back (not to say I'm not among the disgruntled SWG vets ), but the skill advancement system was amazing. If you wanted to be a dancer who also crafts weapons and tames wild creatures, you could do it. If you wanted to highly specialize in collecting resources, making blasters from those resources, and being a master merchant kingpin, you could do it. Hitting the master level in a profession felt like a big accomplishment because it actually took a while, even moreso when you got to the advanced classes (remember trying to become a jedi back in the day? It took FOREVER! Not this carebear system of rolling a jedi when you first log in). You really had the option of becoming ANYTHING you wanted.
Sorry for the rambling, I'm really tired. My point is that levels aren't necessary. Freedom to take the path you wish in a MMO is key. I know there's been other games than SWG that implemented some sort of similar skill progression (although nothing compares to Pre-CU IMO). If you hit max level in that sort of system, that's it, you've completed the progression that the developers intended for you to complete. If you reach your own personal goals in a game via a Pre-CU style system, THAT is where the real satisfaction lies.
Levels are a cheap and easy way to get things done, players are familiar with them, so you will continue to see that system being used (abused?) for many MMO's to come. Something different is _something different_ (mmm redundant statement) and people tend to shy from different things in favour of the familiar. Id love to see Character (and Mob by extension) levels thrown out the window. Racing to Maximum level to play the endgame is poison to a game, people trying to reach endgame fast, ignoring the journey, its the destination that they are focused on.
Why not just have a game that allows you to access endgame right off the bat? Why even develop levelling content apart from it acting as a tutorial, create an indepth tutorial where people learn the mechanics, then grant them instant endgame levels to work on gearing. Saves development time in making low level zones, saves having to worry about tuning monsters to low level characters, and allows people to get on with the real game, you know, the game only begins at max level! (/joking)
Skill based system would be nice, I like the concept of FFXIV in that, you can choose what career you want to play, you ahve a Char and Job level, but still levels, which means monsters will have levels, and so you are funneled into a Goto zone A-B-C-D follow the breadcrumbs as you level and yada yada ENDGAME!!! I like and also dislike the monster scaling, a big part of my lack of enjoyment with Oblivion (Single Player game) was the level scaling. The concept made me a bit wary of level scaling, I may go back and mod that out one day and finally play it through, but there are merits to it, as you describe. Being able to tackle the same monster, when you have advanced in skills and progression and still having it be a challenge would be nice, however, being able to challenge yourself to a more difficult monster might be a problem, as they scale to your level. I like the idea of getting away from Zones being designated for certain levels only, and making the entire world a playground for everyone, where no matter where you go, there will always be something to hunt.
I feel that the suggestion earlier about having skills tied to quests is a brilliant idea, rather than having to go visit a trainer each 1/2/3 levels because somehow this theoretical boundary has been crossed and you are now enlightened enough to learn more powerfull skills/abilities, having to earn them, rather than learn them, through questing sounds like it may lend itself to being able to immerse yourself in the world. I like this thought exercise, I just wish I could offer more ideas and suggestions.
Different strokes for different folks. If you like role playing games that have levels like D&D and WoW, go for that if it suits you. A skill based system is interesting, I like how the characters in EVE Online can evolve and I find that system of character advancement is appropriate for that type of game. What suits the player best, and variety makes for a good mix of games.
I think most of you in this discussion don't even understand what level means
and especially what it does in current mmos!
By now, all the formulas to check failure or success depend on the level.
It's sth like formula for combat success is
100 + {(attacker lvl x 10 + attacker skill) - (defender lvl x 10 + defender skill)} in %.
This means al lvl 10 Mage with a skill of 5 in Dagger has a base chance
to hit a lvl 5 warrior with a Sword skill of 50 of
100 + {(10 x 10 + 5)-(5 x 10 + 50)}% = 105%
The warrior's chance to hit the mage then would be
100 + {(5 x 10 + 50) - (10 x 10 + 5)} = 95%
Comparing these two numbers shows that most of the time, barring lucky dice,
our untrained mage will win against our skilled warrior ^^
(Of course, the formulas aren't all that simple, but basically, success or failure depends to an extremly
high degree on the lvl difference between two sides...)
I personally firmly believe this should not be the case and should not be the way to do this kind of game, as it brings some real problems over the long run of an mmo, as some have posted before.
A 1000 pound Grizzly roaming around the forest in the starter area should always be a danger to a human player character, wether he has just finished the training academy (lvl 1) or can call himself GrandMaster of the Battlefield (lvl 50) or whatever. To the experienced player it should of course be easier to defeat that bear, but not by simple means of lvl, but because he has a wider range of skills to choose from in a given situation. Though, if he has invested his training only into spear and bow skill and finds himself in battle with the cutie bear without his bow or spear and only wielding a sword, which he is untrained in, he would have a much harder time to survive...
In my opinion, lvl should really only be an indicator as to how often an NPC/PC/Mob was able to improve/expand on his abilities/attributes/skills whatever, but it should not be a power indicator per se!
So, a lvl 5 fighter who has invested all his skillpoints up to that lvl into sword/shield combo might just be as effective in combat as a lvl 10 fighter who has spread out his skillpoints up to his lvl into 10 weapon skills, of course only if the 5th lvl has his sword/shield in battle...
(this of course makes most sense if the equipment you may carry around is limited by space/weight and you have to make a decision as to what weapons to carry/use, which I would strongly suggest to bring back, as DAoC already had this to a certain extent)
Using such a system just helps to keep the value in the lowlvl zones even for the experienced player, as a 10 foot orcwarrior wielding a large axe would always be a danger to meet in combat, whether he was raised in eyesight of BlackRockor Orgrimmar, don't you agree!?
This immensely helps developers,too! With this, they can expand their games not only at the top lvl, where after a certain time most players are but in "width" as well, adding a new zone to a game benefits most players now, not only the top lvl, newblvl or midlvl, as to which today zones are "tiered".
Another point all this touches is how armor and weapons are handled in most games.
I think plate armor should always give more protection than cloth armor. So,depending on material, there should be sth like a base damage mitigation value, like 5% for cloth, 15% for soft leather, 30% for hard leather, 50% for chainmail an 75% for plate armor. A full suite of plate armor bought at the armor merchant in the starter area should always give more (base)-protection than even the highest lvl cloth armor. Of course, here is,where magic comes in to improve on protection with magical sewings in cloth or leather armors, talismans of protection and all those nice goodies, but I hope you get what I mean...
I could go on and on, as you might have noticed ^^, but my conclusion to this for now, remove levels from all the formulas to check success or failure but keep it in as an indicator to progress!
I think most of you in this discussion don't even understand what level means
and especially what it does in current mmos!
(I am not qouting that much, scroll up and read it there).
Agreed (and a good post BTW).
Levels are a way to handle experience, it was included by Gygax in the first D&D in the early 70s as a simple way to make the characters better (the game in itself were closer to a board game then a RPG at the time but they kept the leveling system).
In the late 70s some SCA members were complaining that levels were unrealistic and pretty stupid, so they made their own RPG game called "Runequest" without levels. That game got more popular outside US than D&D who however always been largest in NA since the start.
Games workshop, white wolf and many others made their own leveless mechanics while Palladium did a mix between levels and skills.
Most levelless system still have classes but not all. You usually pick some skills from a list just in levelbased systems. In some cases like White wolf you get experience points that you buy stuff for (you pick those things yourself, it is not automatic like in D&D and other level games). In others like runequests skills get better when used while other things don't improve at all.
The mechanics of games like UO, DF and MO are a very simplified system just used for those games and to be honest they are pretty bad all of them. That doesn't mean that the idea of a MMO without levels is bad. Also you can basically make a levelless system that changes your character more or less the same way levels do, the whole idea of levels is just to make things as easy as possible which were practical when you had to do everything by hand.
Here is a few advantages of the 2 different things.
Levels:
* Easy.
* Fast.
* Really simple to balance since all characters are more or less the same.
No levels:
* Realistic.
* Diverse (your character will differ a lot more from everyone else).
* Great customization.
As I said before: This is not about classes. Most P&P games still have classes even if they miss levels, a few like Vampire and Amber doesn't. That is a discussion for itself since you can make a classless system with levels too.
I believe you easily can make a good MMO without levels, but I also think that it is best for games mainly based on PvE (except Warhammers mechanics that is made for PvP and the reason Mythic didn't use them instead is beyond me, it was so stupid) because balance is an issue in PvP and it takes 3 times as much work to balance a regular system without levels as one with.
I was playing Fable earlier and noticed how equipment and weapons do not have level limits. Almost nothing has "levels" except the skill progression, which you earn through actual experience. — And I don't think Guild Wars has level-limited equipment or weapons either.
It actually makes sense not to have these kinds of things.
I too have played and completed Fable2 recently and for the same reason think the opposite!
I am always a player that pushes myself through the boundaries and trys to beat games/mobs before i should. Because of this i pushed my way through Fable and quickly found that i had some high level weapons early. This made the rest of the game a breeze. i found it way too easy and went through the game way too fast.
Probably my own fault due to the way i played it though, so no fault of the game. Hoping three will be more challenging.
So my opinion on the weapon/equip level argument is that they dont need a level as such but should be made unltra difficult to get/achieve at low levels. That way if you do manage it, it's a real achievment.
The simple fact of the matter is that in RL, people have differing levels of training, skill and innate ability, the question is how can you mirror that in an mmo without having some form of progressive system?
Most people think in terms of combat, in this case it's pretty clear that the two most obvious systems are twitch mechanics and tactical turn-based mechanics. Players have the same base 'stats', the one wth the greater reactions and/or the greater tactical nuance is the most likely victor. To me both are perfectly viable but both do have their downsides. The former leads to bunny hopping and double jumping et al which can look ridiculous in certain settings, whilst the latter can lead to a too slow combat speed for certain games/players.
In terms of non-combat skills then, again there really is not set need for progression/levelling be it based around set levels or skill points. You could simply earn qualifications/certificates by demonstrating skill at a task in game as you would IRL. The more skilled you are the better quals you get and as such you get access to better equipment/ships/whatever. The issue here is that those naturally capable at the game would also have access to the better gear, but then thats pretty mucht eh case in most mmos anyway.
Whilst it's clear we don't need progression systems (infact to my mind it would be better if we had none), it's clear they are needed if you want people who don't have any skill to compete in an mmo. Currently someone who isn't anygood at tactics or twitch can still grind there way up to endgame and essential out point/gear npcs and certain similar ability players. In a non progression, true player skill game they wouldn't have a chance.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I personally see nothing wrong with levels. They're a measure of progress, just as skill levels are.
I can understand why some people feel they're not good, but I don't necessarily agree with those reasons.
I don't care if a game has levels, or how many. I don't care if it's skill-based.
As long as there's some sense of progression, and the content along the way is entertaining and interesting to me, I'll play it.
But then, I'm not one of these "MMOs are all about end-game and the purpose of playing them is to race through everything else as fast as possible, because none of it matters" types. To me, the "real game" is everything and anything I choose to do while I'm logged in; it's not "what I'll be doing in 3 weeks from now and if I can get there even faster". I also don't tend to burn-out on MMOs nearly as fast as many of those types do. Might be a coincidence. Might be cause and effect. I'm guessing the latter.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I think most of you in this discussion don't even understand what level means
and especially what it does in current mmos!
(I am not qouting that much, scroll up and read it there).
Agreed (and a good post BTW).
Levels are a way to handle experience, it was included by Gygax in the first D&D in the early 70s as a simple way to make the characters better (the game in itself were closer to a board game then a RPG at the time but they kept the leveling system).
In the late 70s some SCA members were complaining that levels were unrealistic and pretty stupid, so they made their own RPG game called "Runequest" without levels. That game got more popular outside US than D&D who however always been largest in NA since the start.
Nice summary of the good old PnP times ^^
I remember one time in the mid to late 80ies, yes 80ies ^^, when I sat down and completely removed lvls from my Rolemaster campaign and had each skill progress individually by use, getting exp checks every time a player used it, (think I borrowed that from Cthulhu/RuneQuest?), it was just sooo tedious ;-)
Would have been great back then to have a laptop to run the character(spread)sheets on ^^
Back on topic,
I really do like level systems in simplistic games like Diablo or other action rpgs, but in world simulation games, that's what I like to think of mmos, yeah I still can dream, I really do like rulessystems that give more freedom to the player in creating, advancing and playing his charater(s)...
So, my ideal game would have to be skill-based, but keeping the levels for bookkeping and a metagame progress-indicator, and have no metagame classes.
Classes instead would only be an in-game thing like a guild-membership, giving (cheaper) access to the guild's trainers/merchants/traininggrounds etc. So, if you started as a Ranger you could use the Ranger trainers in your realm/region/startertown/faction etc. And if later on you want to learn to use heavy armor, you do quests/faction for the warrior guild to get access to their trainers for example. (oh, and introduce player teaching to expand on this, to illegally learn backstab-skill from an other player ^^)
This even opens up the world to trainers in different regions teaching other/advanced/specialty skills of a given class, giving reasons to explore and travel around, travel back even as an experienced character to other starting areas to find that one special druid teacher that teaches bearform or that legendary trainer in the far off region of Eastia that teaches Drunken Monk combat style ;-)
An option could even be to start out as no-class class ^^ Finally, what drives most adventurers to be an adventurer? Well, they just couldn't stand spending looong hours on hard banks in class-rooms to finish their education and now are just jobless scoundrels in search for money and food! (don't believe their babble about fame and adventure) ;-) They would have to pick some base skills of may be the warrior and/or rogue guilds...
And I really think today we do have the computing power (server-side, ?network-side? and client-side) to do all this!
Great point and its something that bothered me a lot in most MMO's. EvE kinda makes more sense of this. If I was in a destroyer and even with 100 million+ skill points, I would still be killed by a NPC in a starter zone using a bigger ship, mostly.
The reason I prefer to see a skill based system that players can access by doing missions etc. Is that its more realistic. In agreement with what you stated, generally. A level 1 player will find it difficult to kill a bear as they have little to combat it. A level 20 player stripped down of armour and not using the skills they have acquired should be able to be killed by the same bear. The only reason why the bear is easier, is due to wearing better armour and using better skills.
One thing about Tabula Rasa which I really really liked is the Logos element. To access a new skill that you acquired you would need a certain set of logos. These were found all over the place, behind waterfalls, in combat zones, in caves... etc.
Its an RPG dream IMO to achieve skills through feats. Imagine a mission to climb a mountain and defeat a griffing. The griffin's beak is grounded down by the mission giver NPC and you obtain a skill by drinking the potion.
I would also like to see combat skills achieved through doing a mini course or event. e.g. I want to learn 1h weapons. The trainer asks me to hit a series of targets within 60 seconds. This should be challenging and quite hard until you have gained additional skills to help, e.g. increasing running speed, stamina etc.
Originally posted by Roswyck
Not toinsult anyone here, but ^^,
I think most of you in this discussion don't even understand what level means
and especially what it does in current mmos!
By now, all the formulas to check failure or success depend on the level.
No levels are not needed to produce an RPG. You also don't need any changes to the basic starting gear and stats. The question is how long will people play that type of game?
Yet I feel this is essentially the situation with current MMOs. There is no real change. Your stats go up, your level goes up, and I agree these are all something that give a sense of progress. However, you have nothing to actually show for that progress: the enemies remain same, areas remain same, and the rewards remain same.
Heck even your abilities remain same. Is it really progress if you start with Lightning Bolt at level 1 and at level 60 get Lightning Surge if they are visually indentical (or worse yet, lightning bolt I and Lightning Bolt VI). It's only numbers changing in current games.
What would you like to change? RPGs are based on numbers and numbers can only go up, down, or stay the same. MMOs have to be based on numbers they are being caculated by computers. I do not know how you change this dynamic without changing it to a FPS type game.
If you read my post you see that I'm not advocating removal of character levels. I feel they are a necessary part of character progression. What I'm suggesting is scaling monsters and rewards to your character's level.
Currently enemies and rewards drop at certain levels which you have to match to your level. So instead of you having to be high enough level for a reward or enemy, the reward or enemy adjusts itself to your level.
Essentially it's the toolbox that grows with levels. Not actual power level since this has always been an illusion (i.e. level 1 spider vs level 50 spider. Same enemy, only number changes).
What exactly this achieves you may ask? All areas become available to all levels unlike now where the areas are level gated. Meaning more content that is available for everyone and no actually "wasted" content like starter areas in current MMOs.
Edit: Actual difficulty of enemies is controlled by tiers (or whatever you choose to call them). Level 50 character would most likely have easier time against tier2 and tier3 foes simply because they have more tools (skills, traits) available but it would not be numerically impossible for level 1 character to defeat same foe. Especially if they team with another player.
Spider is a spider whether it is level 1 or level 50 character fighting it. This is not the case in current MMOs where there are level 1 spiders and level 50 spiders. Yet from visual point of view there is no difference. Heck, the level 50 spider might even be smaller than level 1 spider - or dragon - or what not.
I was responding to the section in red, the part that I quoted. I was not reffering to the op.
Your teir system cannot work in an open world, everything would have to be instanced. I ignored that part because it is not feasible in what I would call an MMO. I guess it could be done if there was just a lobby and people went to an instanace to fight. I do not think of that as an MMO though, even if it is. I am not going to argue the definition of MMO because it has been done to death and does not really matter.
“It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will have enough to pay for something better.”
I dont remember ever seeing a level 50 mouse in any game.
Or a dragon that is only level 10, for that matter.
Rats, spiders, wolves... why are we killing those in heroic games anyways. I'd rather not name games but for example Everquests (be it 1 or 2) are an examples where you are the scourge of woodlands. Where these tiny, and possibly cute, critters are a threat no matter what level you are.
Even one of my favorite games (Guild Wars) forces me to fight beetles and other critters.
I have never actually truly played WoW but unless I'm wrong even WoW has critters that can show up on high levels. Such as wolves and bears which, while certainly ferocious foes (tier1 foes) should not be a match for an elemental (tier2) and even less for a dragon (tier3-4 foe).
You can reskin a spider, or a wolf, all you want and give it new fancy names and levels but it still doesn't change the simple fact that it's a spider or a wolf.
Besides you can easily replace a rat, spider or a wolf with an orc or other standard fantasy enemy. If they already cover whole character level range from level 1 to 60 do you really need to split them to certain monster level ranges? Why not scale them to player level? No more level 1-5 zones,level 6-10 zones etc.
I was responding to the section in red, the part that I quoted. I was not reffering to the op.
Your teir system cannot work in an open world, everything would have to be instanced. I ignored that part because it is not feasible in what I would call an MMO. I guess it could be done if there was just a lobby and people went to an instanace to fight. I do not think of that as an MMO though, even if it is. I am not going to argue the definition of MMO because it has been done to death and does not really matter.
Please explain me why it wouldn't work in an open world system?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I don't believe, no I KNOW that levels (and linear content) are not necessary in an MMORPG. I know this, because I have played a few MMORPGs without level and they did just fine.
I'm not a big fan of scaling everything though. Scaling can have the same negative effect that "level-gating" has. It makes it feel like your level means nothing. If everything is scaled to your level, then that level 1 bandit is still a pain at level 60. Oblivion had level scaling, and I think it was the game's biggest drawback.
In my opinion, the big issue with levels is the freaking power gap inbetween levels. In most MMORPGs, you have NO chance against a monster 5 levels above you, and one 5 levels below you is trivial and worthless to you. This, in effect, forces you into small little "niches" as you level, level-gates as you would called them. I don't think this massive power-gap is necessary, do you really need to be 5000 times more powerful than someone 5 levels below you?
Personally, I like the way advancement was handled in UO. In UO, if you wanted to fight a more powerful monster, or go into a more dangerous area, it was more about getting the TOOLS to do so than just grinding up levels. Want to fight a demon? Then you better be able to mitigate its damage. You could do this by getting great armor, learning a summoning spell to have a pet tank for you, or taming a tough monster to tank for you. Options.
Also in UO, while leveling up weapon/magic skills did make you do more damage, it wasn't a HUGE advantage. A grandmaster mage with GM in all magic supporting skills might do like twice the damage as a journeyman mage with flamestrike...at least that's how it was when I played it. So the GM mage would be stronger but not extremely stronger. Lower level areas would still be a challenge to him.
Comments
Ive made a topic like this before. Levels are not necessary imho. There are much more creative ways to reward experience and progress other than a number stamped next to your avatar.
Not in the least.
For the 1% of the people who claim they "enjoy the story" and are in "no rush to reach level cap", 99% race through all the dialog and view it as nothing more than a necessary grind.
Leveling is a waste of development time, a waste of player time and a waste of resources. Quests are fine, direction is fine...but levels are simply something to get through as quick as possible to me.
Skill based advancement>level based advancement
There have been a lot of ideas posted here with merit. I myself ended up on these Forums because of this very topic. I have a desire to play MMOs again, but I cannot handle the grind.
People who say it "can't be done" are being unimaginative and fueling the problem, but their points do still have merit. Leveling, being such a core design to these games, may be the key to this rumored "next gen" MMO we hear of so often. If someone can find a way to revamp the system, that may be the so-called next generation.
I for one do agree leveling has its uses. Nothing was quite as exciting as my first MMO experience, and I enjoyed the leveling. But therein lies also the problem: its only fun the first time. Once you have done it in one game, you no longer want to do it. Every new MMO we all utter the same words, "Here we go again."
A revamp of this system needs to cover TWO areas: First, it needs to address the veteran MMO players who tire of the same grind over and over. Second, it needs to remain friendly and interesting to new players who have yet to find leveling a chore. I refuse to believe that such a system could not be created. Developers have barely even tried. It remains an almost untried direction.
However, this gives rise to an obvious concern. What use is playing for a long time when you don't get any reward for your efforts? I would offer this counterpoint: What is the point of starting if you know you cannot do anything until you sink time into the game?
Progression is necessary. A system of Leveling, as we know it, is not. There are still numerous ways to offer people a sense of progression. Our huge mistake, and the problem with developers, is that we are too afraid to move outside the comfort zone and try something new. Leveling was the original way, we're used to it, and we haven't seen anything new that works. The bigger problem though, is that we haven't seen anything new at all.
Allow me to provide an example system, just off the top of my head.
Characters and monsters have Power Levels, but their stats are normalized. Example: A Lv. 1 Spider has 1000 HP. A Lv. 50 Spider has 1000 HP, and Your Character has 1000 HP. What then is the difference? A level difference will alter the effects of combat.
For example. If you are Power Level 1 and you attack a Power Level 1 Spider, you deal 100% normal damage to it, and it deals 100% normal damage to you. However, if you attack a Power Level 50 Spider, you deal 51% normal damage to it, and it deals 149% normal damage to you.
In addition, your theoretical Power Level could have account-wide effects. That way, if you start a new character, you will not be "back to square one". Perhaps if you have played previous games by the company, they could even give you this bonus automatically for being a veteran.
This is just a rough system, but it could be refined and polished. It's a new idea, and that is what we need: new ideas.
I am the Warrior.
In order to kill, I must close with my enemy. I see their eyes. I smell their breath. I taste their fear.
I disagree for the reasons I stated prior Tux.
Not only that, lvling is your "learning curve". Getting to know the functionality of your character.
More so than that though, is what I stated prior....the mix/match stuff. If you are talking fixed skills is one thing.....when you got a SWG skill tree from different classes you create one boondagle of iterations that content must be balanced for.
So I suppose tf would depend on what you refer to as "skill based".
Asking Devs to make AAA sandbox titles is like trying to get fine dining on a McDonalds dollar menu budget.
Its already been done. Look at EvE. Its purely skill based and what skills you purchase. They are the only firm I can say have done this well and it works. e.g. a player 2 days old can go into a battle with dozens of players who have been playing for 5 years. They can still equip equipment that adds value in the battle.
I would love to see a fantasy MMO like EvE and missions would reward (besides loot / mats) skills that you can equip. So if ou want that fireball then you will need to do something pretty special. Not just hit next level and go 'bam! I know fireball'. That way a player who is firing fireballs, those around know they have completed that kick arse dungeon etc.
Fallen Earth has levels but its not really a level system at all. You buy your skills / buffs or earn them and distribute AP into some main skills. If they removed the level number then it wouldnt make any difference.
So it has been done, just not widely used. I figure paper based D&D set the trend of XP and levels.
I make no difference between skill levels and character levels. They have the same effect only it is slightly harder to interpret. Missions are scaled for skill levels:
Frigates, Destroyers
Cruisers, Assault ships
Battlecruisers, Heavy assault ships
Battleships, Command ships, Strategic cruisers, Marauders
...
SP demand goes along the lines F < D < C < AS < BC < BS < HAC < SC < CS < M
And it bars content from the "low-level characters": You cannot do shit in majority of deadspace complexes or wormhole spaces of class 3 and onward with just a Battlecruiser.
Putting an artificial restriction and having instakill zones for the "lowbies" is the same thing for me. The former just tells it to me in advance. Why would I want to go in a zone/dungeon if I'd be killed in an instant and can't do shit?
Not to forget: You cannot join capital ship fleets unless you have a capital ship. Sure, there are other fleets you can join but isn't that the same as going for another lower level zone/dungeon?
Again, no difference.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
I'm not sure if you are referring to my post when talking about scaling or the current MMO situation because essentially now a mouse is same as a dragon. In fact in some games a mouse is more powerful than a dragon because there might be a level 50 mouse where as a dragon might be merely level 10,
Levels exist but they are not utilized to give a sense of power, merely numerical progress. Your level 50 character facing a level 50 mouse is no more powerful than a level 1 character facing a level 1 mouse. It's still a mouse you are facing. Only now you have fancy looking armor and spells that should be slaying hundreds of mouses. Only they don't.
The only illusion of progress here is a numerical one: character level. For me it's not quite enough. For my sense of enjoyment I'd like the changes to be both visual and strategical. Mice should not have a place as serious enemies anyways but there are still your regular orcs, giant spiders, minotaurs and what not. Should these creatures be comparable in power to giants, dragons and other legendary creatures? More powerful than then?
I feel the answer is no and that's why I'd rather assign a "tier" or "difficulty level" to enemy based on how great of a threat it is. A level 1 spider is same as level 50 spider but a level 1 dragon is not same as level 1 spider - or even level 50 spider. A level 1 dragon would beat level 50 spider because essentially enemies would not have levels.
A level 1 spider and level 50 spider would not exist. There is merely a spider, and a dragon, and characters of different levels facing them. They would not even show levels. A dragon would be always more powerful than a spider. Only character level and their toolbox (skills, equipment, what not...) grows.
So in the system I'd like to see a Jawa is not same as a Darth Vader. A Jawa would be tier1 regular mook where as Darth Vader would be tier3 elite mob that requires a team. It just doesn't matter if that team is level 1 players or level 50 players other than level 50 players having slightly better chance to defeat DV as they have more tools (skills/abilities/equipment) to choose from - to give them situational advantages.
I'd like to repeat I can see various benefits from this:
no more spiders and regular mobs being stronger than dragons
you can face all content regardless of your level
no wasted design on areas that people won't revisit because without level gating all areas are available to all levels
no need to constantly replace your items as they don't scale to your level
However I'd like to see more opinions about levels. These are naturally just mine.
- Beregar
Absolutely not.
Levels are a misleading sense of progress. Yeah, you might advance in levels by doing quests and griding mobs, but in almost every MMO, the main focus is endgame. Hell, I don't play WoW, but didn't they do something where it makes leveling 1-60 really fast now? I feel like right when games with leveling systems come out, it usually takes people a while to hit max level because noone really knows yet how to do it. After the game has been out for a good amount of time, most people can hit max level in a month.
I hate to bring up SWG (Pre-CU) because I feel the topic has been beaten to death and back (not to say I'm not among the disgruntled SWG vets
), but the skill advancement system was amazing. If you wanted to be a dancer who also crafts weapons and tames wild creatures, you could do it. If you wanted to highly specialize in collecting resources, making blasters from those resources, and being a master merchant kingpin, you could do it. Hitting the master level in a profession felt like a big accomplishment because it actually took a while, even moreso when you got to the advanced classes (remember trying to become a jedi back in the day? It took FOREVER! Not this carebear system of rolling a jedi when you first log in). You really had the option of becoming ANYTHING you wanted.
Sorry for the rambling, I'm really tired. My point is that levels aren't necessary. Freedom to take the path you wish in a MMO is key. I know there's been other games than SWG that implemented some sort of similar skill progression (although nothing compares to Pre-CU IMO). If you hit max level in that sort of system, that's it, you've completed the progression that the developers intended for you to complete. If you reach your own personal goals in a game via a Pre-CU style system, THAT is where the real satisfaction lies.
/end nostalgia
Levels are a cheap and easy way to get things done, players are familiar with them, so you will continue to see that system being used (abused?) for many MMO's to come. Something different is _something different_ (mmm redundant statement) and people tend to shy from different things in favour of the familiar. Id love to see Character (and Mob by extension) levels thrown out the window. Racing to Maximum level to play the endgame is poison to a game, people trying to reach endgame fast, ignoring the journey, its the destination that they are focused on.
Why not just have a game that allows you to access endgame right off the bat? Why even develop levelling content apart from it acting as a tutorial, create an indepth tutorial where people learn the mechanics, then grant them instant endgame levels to work on gearing. Saves development time in making low level zones, saves having to worry about tuning monsters to low level characters, and allows people to get on with the real game, you know, the game only begins at max level! (/joking)
Skill based system would be nice, I like the concept of FFXIV in that, you can choose what career you want to play, you ahve a Char and Job level, but still levels, which means monsters will have levels, and so you are funneled into a Goto zone A-B-C-D follow the breadcrumbs as you level and yada yada ENDGAME!!! I like and also dislike the monster scaling, a big part of my lack of enjoyment with Oblivion (Single Player game) was the level scaling. The concept made me a bit wary of level scaling, I may go back and mod that out one day and finally play it through, but there are merits to it, as you describe. Being able to tackle the same monster, when you have advanced in skills and progression and still having it be a challenge would be nice, however, being able to challenge yourself to a more difficult monster might be a problem, as they scale to your level. I like the idea of getting away from Zones being designated for certain levels only, and making the entire world a playground for everyone, where no matter where you go, there will always be something to hunt.
I feel that the suggestion earlier about having skills tied to quests is a brilliant idea, rather than having to go visit a trainer each 1/2/3 levels because somehow this theoretical boundary has been crossed and you are now enlightened enough to learn more powerfull skills/abilities, having to earn them, rather than learn them, through questing sounds like it may lend itself to being able to immerse yourself in the world. I like this thought exercise, I just wish I could offer more ideas and suggestions.
Different strokes for different folks. If you like role playing games that have levels like D&D and WoW, go for that if it suits you. A skill based system is interesting, I like how the characters in EVE Online can evolve and I find that system of character advancement is appropriate for that type of game. What suits the player best, and variety makes for a good mix of games.
Not toinsult anyone here, but ^^,
I think most of you in this discussion don't even understand what level means
and especially what it does in current mmos!
By now, all the formulas to check failure or success depend on the level.
It's sth like formula for combat success is
100 + {(attacker lvl x 10 + attacker skill) - (defender lvl x 10 + defender skill)} in %.
This means al lvl 10 Mage with a skill of 5 in Dagger has a base chance
to hit a lvl 5 warrior with a Sword skill of 50 of
100 + {(10 x 10 + 5)-(5 x 10 + 50)}% = 105%
The warrior's chance to hit the mage then would be
100 + {(5 x 10 + 50) - (10 x 10 + 5)} = 95%
Comparing these two numbers shows that most of the time, barring lucky dice,
our untrained mage will win against our skilled warrior ^^
(Of course, the formulas aren't all that simple, but basically, success or failure depends to an extremly
high degree on the lvl difference between two sides...)
I personally firmly believe this should not be the case and should not be the way to do this kind of game, as it brings some real problems over the long run of an mmo, as some have posted before.
A 1000 pound Grizzly roaming around the forest in the starter area should always be a danger to a human player character, wether he has just finished the training academy (lvl 1) or can call himself GrandMaster of the Battlefield (lvl 50) or whatever. To the experienced player it should of course be easier to defeat that bear, but not by simple means of lvl, but because he has a wider range of skills to choose from in a given situation. Though, if he has invested his training only into spear and bow skill and finds himself in battle with the cutie bear without his bow or spear and only wielding a sword, which he is untrained in, he would have a much harder time to survive...
In my opinion, lvl should really only be an indicator as to how often an NPC/PC/Mob was able to improve/expand on his abilities/attributes/skills whatever, but it should not be a power indicator per se!
So, a lvl 5 fighter who has invested all his skillpoints up to that lvl into sword/shield combo might just be as effective in combat as a lvl 10 fighter who has spread out his skillpoints up to his lvl into 10 weapon skills, of course only if the 5th lvl has his sword/shield in battle...
(this of course makes most sense if the equipment you may carry around is limited by space/weight and you have to make a decision as to what weapons to carry/use, which I would strongly suggest to bring back, as DAoC already had this to a certain extent)
Using such a system just helps to keep the value in the lowlvl zones even for the experienced player, as a 10 foot orcwarrior wielding a large axe would always be a danger to meet in combat, whether he was raised in eyesight of BlackRockor Orgrimmar, don't you agree!?
This immensely helps developers,too! With this, they can expand their games not only at the top lvl, where after a certain time most players are but in "width" as well, adding a new zone to a game benefits most players now, not only the top lvl, newblvl or midlvl, as to which today zones are "tiered".
Another point all this touches is how armor and weapons are handled in most games.
I think plate armor should always give more protection than cloth armor. So,depending on material, there should be sth like a base damage mitigation value, like 5% for cloth, 15% for soft leather, 30% for hard leather, 50% for chainmail an 75% for plate armor. A full suite of plate armor bought at the armor merchant in the starter area should always give more (base)-protection than even the highest lvl cloth armor. Of course, here is,where magic comes in to improve on protection with magical sewings in cloth or leather armors, talismans of protection and all those nice goodies, but I hope you get what I mean...
I could go on and on, as you might have noticed ^^, but my conclusion to this for now, remove levels from all the formulas to check success or failure but keep it in as an indicator to progress!
Agreed (and a good post BTW).
Levels are a way to handle experience, it was included by Gygax in the first D&D in the early 70s as a simple way to make the characters better (the game in itself were closer to a board game then a RPG at the time but they kept the leveling system).
In the late 70s some SCA members were complaining that levels were unrealistic and pretty stupid, so they made their own RPG game called "Runequest" without levels. That game got more popular outside US than D&D who however always been largest in NA since the start.
Games workshop, white wolf and many others made their own leveless mechanics while Palladium did a mix between levels and skills.
Most levelless system still have classes but not all. You usually pick some skills from a list just in levelbased systems. In some cases like White wolf you get experience points that you buy stuff for (you pick those things yourself, it is not automatic like in D&D and other level games). In others like runequests skills get better when used while other things don't improve at all.
The mechanics of games like UO, DF and MO are a very simplified system just used for those games and to be honest they are pretty bad all of them. That doesn't mean that the idea of a MMO without levels is bad. Also you can basically make a levelless system that changes your character more or less the same way levels do, the whole idea of levels is just to make things as easy as possible which were practical when you had to do everything by hand.
Here is a few advantages of the 2 different things.
Levels:
* Easy.
* Fast.
* Really simple to balance since all characters are more or less the same.
No levels:
* Realistic.
* Diverse (your character will differ a lot more from everyone else).
* Great customization.
As I said before: This is not about classes. Most P&P games still have classes even if they miss levels, a few like Vampire and Amber doesn't. That is a discussion for itself since you can make a classless system with levels too.
I believe you easily can make a good MMO without levels, but I also think that it is best for games mainly based on PvE (except Warhammers mechanics that is made for PvP and the reason Mythic didn't use them instead is beyond me, it was so stupid) because balance is an issue in PvP and it takes 3 times as much work to balance a regular system without levels as one with.
I too have played and completed Fable2 recently and for the same reason think the opposite!
I am always a player that pushes myself through the boundaries and trys to beat games/mobs before i should. Because of this i pushed my way through Fable and quickly found that i had some high level weapons early. This made the rest of the game a breeze. i found it way too easy and went through the game way too fast.
Probably my own fault due to the way i played it though, so no fault of the game. Hoping three will be more challenging.
So my opinion on the weapon/equip level argument is that they dont need a level as such but should be made unltra difficult to get/achieve at low levels. That way if you do manage it, it's a real achievment.
The simple fact of the matter is that in RL, people have differing levels of training, skill and innate ability, the question is how can you mirror that in an mmo without having some form of progressive system?
Most people think in terms of combat, in this case it's pretty clear that the two most obvious systems are twitch mechanics and tactical turn-based mechanics. Players have the same base 'stats', the one wth the greater reactions and/or the greater tactical nuance is the most likely victor. To me both are perfectly viable but both do have their downsides. The former leads to bunny hopping and double jumping et al which can look ridiculous in certain settings, whilst the latter can lead to a too slow combat speed for certain games/players.
In terms of non-combat skills then, again there really is not set need for progression/levelling be it based around set levels or skill points. You could simply earn qualifications/certificates by demonstrating skill at a task in game as you would IRL. The more skilled you are the better quals you get and as such you get access to better equipment/ships/whatever. The issue here is that those naturally capable at the game would also have access to the better gear, but then thats pretty mucht eh case in most mmos anyway.
Whilst it's clear we don't need progression systems (infact to my mind it would be better if we had none), it's clear they are needed if you want people who don't have any skill to compete in an mmo. Currently someone who isn't anygood at tactics or twitch can still grind there way up to endgame and essential out point/gear npcs and certain similar ability players. In a non progression, true player skill game they wouldn't have a chance.
"Come and have a look at what you could have won."
I personally see nothing wrong with levels. They're a measure of progress, just as skill levels are.
I can understand why some people feel they're not good, but I don't necessarily agree with those reasons.
I don't care if a game has levels, or how many. I don't care if it's skill-based.
As long as there's some sense of progression, and the content along the way is entertaining and interesting to me, I'll play it.
But then, I'm not one of these "MMOs are all about end-game and the purpose of playing them is to race through everything else as fast as possible, because none of it matters" types. To me, the "real game" is everything and anything I choose to do while I'm logged in; it's not "what I'll be doing in 3 weeks from now and if I can get there even faster". I also don't tend to burn-out on MMOs nearly as fast as many of those types do. Might be a coincidence. Might be cause and effect. I'm guessing the latter.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Nice summary of the good old PnP times ^^
I remember one time in the mid to late 80ies, yes 80ies ^^, when I sat down and completely removed lvls from my Rolemaster campaign and had each skill progress individually by use, getting exp checks every time a player used it, (think I borrowed that from Cthulhu/RuneQuest?), it was just sooo tedious ;-)
Would have been great back then to have a laptop to run the character(spread)sheets on ^^
Back on topic,
I really do like level systems in simplistic games like Diablo or other action rpgs, but in world simulation games, that's what I like to think of mmos, yeah I still can dream, I really do like rulessystems that give more freedom to the player in creating, advancing and playing his charater(s)...
So, my ideal game would have to be skill-based, but keeping the levels for bookkeping and a metagame progress-indicator, and have no metagame classes.
Classes instead would only be an in-game thing like a guild-membership, giving (cheaper) access to the guild's trainers/merchants/traininggrounds etc. So, if you started as a Ranger you could use the Ranger trainers in your realm/region/startertown/faction etc. And if later on you want to learn to use heavy armor, you do quests/faction for the warrior guild to get access to their trainers for example. (oh, and introduce player teaching to expand on this, to illegally learn backstab-skill from an other player ^^)
This even opens up the world to trainers in different regions teaching other/advanced/specialty skills of a given class, giving reasons to explore and travel around, travel back even as an experienced character to other starting areas to find that one special druid teacher that teaches bearform or that legendary trainer in the far off region of Eastia that teaches Drunken Monk combat style ;-)
An option could even be to start out as no-class class ^^ Finally, what drives most adventurers to be an adventurer? Well, they just couldn't stand spending looong hours on hard banks in class-rooms to finish their education and now are just jobless scoundrels in search for money and food! (don't believe their babble about fame and adventure) ;-) They would have to pick some base skills of may be the warrior and/or rogue guilds...
And I really think today we do have the computing power (server-side, ?network-side? and client-side) to do all this!
I dont remember ever seeing a level 50 mouse in any game.
Or a dragon that is only level 10, for that matter.
Great point and its something that bothered me a lot in most MMO's. EvE kinda makes more sense of this. If I was in a destroyer and even with 100 million+ skill points, I would still be killed by a NPC in a starter zone using a bigger ship, mostly.
The reason I prefer to see a skill based system that players can access by doing missions etc. Is that its more realistic. In agreement with what you stated, generally. A level 1 player will find it difficult to kill a bear as they have little to combat it. A level 20 player stripped down of armour and not using the skills they have acquired should be able to be killed by the same bear. The only reason why the bear is easier, is due to wearing better armour and using better skills.
One thing about Tabula Rasa which I really really liked is the Logos element. To access a new skill that you acquired you would need a certain set of logos. These were found all over the place, behind waterfalls, in combat zones, in caves... etc.
Its an RPG dream IMO to achieve skills through feats. Imagine a mission to climb a mountain and defeat a griffing. The griffin's beak is grounded down by the mission giver NPC and you obtain a skill by drinking the potion.
I would also like to see combat skills achieved through doing a mini course or event. e.g. I want to learn 1h weapons. The trainer asks me to hit a series of targets within 60 seconds. This should be challenging and quite hard until you have gained additional skills to help, e.g. increasing running speed, stamina etc.
d
Here's a rat:
http://www.wowhead.com/npc=10441#comments
Not the kind of dragon you want, but the best I could find on short notice:
http://www.wowhead.com/npc=441
I was responding to the section in red, the part that I quoted. I was not reffering to the op.
Your teir system cannot work in an open world, everything would have to be instanced. I ignored that part because it is not feasible in what I would call an MMO. I guess it could be done if there was just a lobby and people went to an instanace to fight. I do not think of that as an MMO though, even if it is. I am not going to argue the definition of MMO because it has been done to death and does not really matter.
--John Ruskin
Rats, spiders, wolves... why are we killing those in heroic games anyways. I'd rather not name games but for example Everquests (be it 1 or 2) are an examples where you are the scourge of woodlands. Where these tiny, and possibly cute, critters are a threat no matter what level you are.
Even one of my favorite games (Guild Wars) forces me to fight beetles and other critters.
I have never actually truly played WoW but unless I'm wrong even WoW has critters that can show up on high levels. Such as wolves and bears which, while certainly ferocious foes (tier1 foes) should not be a match for an elemental (tier2) and even less for a dragon (tier3-4 foe).
You can reskin a spider, or a wolf, all you want and give it new fancy names and levels but it still doesn't change the simple fact that it's a spider or a wolf.
Besides you can easily replace a rat, spider or a wolf with an orc or other standard fantasy enemy. If they already cover whole character level range from level 1 to 60 do you really need to split them to certain monster level ranges? Why not scale them to player level? No more level 1-5 zones,level 6-10 zones etc.
- Beregar
Please explain me why it wouldn't work in an open world system?
- Beregar
Character progression is one of the defining characteristics of an MMORPG.
Levels are not.
Developers usually don't remember this and can't seem to think out of the box.
Pity.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Exactly.
I don't believe, no I KNOW that levels (and linear content) are not necessary in an MMORPG. I know this, because I have played a few MMORPGs without level and they did just fine.
I'm not a big fan of scaling everything though. Scaling can have the same negative effect that "level-gating" has. It makes it feel like your level means nothing. If everything is scaled to your level, then that level 1 bandit is still a pain at level 60. Oblivion had level scaling, and I think it was the game's biggest drawback.
In my opinion, the big issue with levels is the freaking power gap inbetween levels. In most MMORPGs, you have NO chance against a monster 5 levels above you, and one 5 levels below you is trivial and worthless to you. This, in effect, forces you into small little "niches" as you level, level-gates as you would called them. I don't think this massive power-gap is necessary, do you really need to be 5000 times more powerful than someone 5 levels below you?
Personally, I like the way advancement was handled in UO. In UO, if you wanted to fight a more powerful monster, or go into a more dangerous area, it was more about getting the TOOLS to do so than just grinding up levels. Want to fight a demon? Then you better be able to mitigate its damage. You could do this by getting great armor, learning a summoning spell to have a pet tank for you, or taming a tough monster to tank for you. Options.
Also in UO, while leveling up weapon/magic skills did make you do more damage, it wasn't a HUGE advantage. A grandmaster mage with GM in all magic supporting skills might do like twice the damage as a journeyman mage with flamestrike...at least that's how it was when I played it. So the GM mage would be stronger but not extremely stronger. Lower level areas would still be a challenge to him.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?