I honestly mean no disrespect when I say this, but to some extent, I believe this argument stems from the instant gratificaiton mindset that is predominant in the current generation of gamers.
Let's look at some old games, shall we?
Let's start early. Pong. Pong is a game with total instant gratification. You sit down, you play, there is no imbalance at all, everything is reliant upon skill.
How about Pacman? Donkey Kong? Mario Bros.? How about fighting games? Old style FPSs? (Quake, Doom, Unreal Tournament and so on) Platformers? Puzzlers? Older driving games? (Outrun, anything pre-Gran Turismo, really.) Lightgun games?
Heck, let's look at games in the form of sports. Football? Basketball? Volleyball?
How about board games? Chess for example?
All of these have one thing in common. The dividing factor is SKILL. Skill can be gained through time, but it is not time itself that divides the good from the bad.
Your 'instant gratification mindset' is a myth. A fallacy. A lie. An untruth. It has nothing to do with what the original poster is asking for.
In fact, you can see that MMORPGs... descended from CRPGs, descended from RPGs... have a thoroughly unnatural method of advancement in a game that supplants skill in many cases. Time. Not skill, not the feeling of 'This person is better', but seniority.
People in MMORPGs are mostly 'better' because they've been there longer, or sinking more time into it. We see, in fact, that MMORPG players are the unnatural products of a new generation... a generation that believes that sheer time invested is a more important quality than individual skill.
The original poster never said 'I want a game that rewards me just because I'm playing, right now', but a game that rewards him for SKILL and ability. What's wrong with that? You shouldn't be condescending towards him, that's a PERFECTLY reasonable request.
If I kick total butt in chess, I don't wantt o have to play 500 matches against 3 year olds before they let me play against somebody as good as me... I want to play against people of my own skill level, as quickly as possible, and I want my wins and losses to be solely dependent upon how much I bring to the game. Time should be space for practice, which improves skills, not mostly a method to automatically advance.
First of all, I think your taking one statement a bit out of context. But anyway...
Let's look at some old games, shall we?
Let's start early. Pong. Pong is a game with total instant gratification. You sit down, you play, there is no imbalance at all, everything is reliant upon skill.
How about Pacman? Donkey Kong? Mario Bros.? How about fighting games? Old style FPSs? (Quake, Doom, Unreal Tournament and so on) Platformers? Puzzlers? Older driving games? (Outrun, anything pre-Gran Turismo, really.) Lightgun games?
Heck, let's look at games in the form of sports. Football? Basketball? Volleyball?
How about board games? Chess for example?
All of these have one thing in common. The dividing factor is SKILL. Skill can be gained through time, but it is not time itself that divides the good from the bad.
I don't disagree with you, but those games are not MMOs (or MMORPGs for those who wish to specific). It's fine to enjoy games that are based upon skill, but is every game required to be based on that? Some of us don't enjoy getting shot in the face repeatedly by 15 year olds who are 'SKILLED' at shooters. Which is exactly why, we choose to play MMOs, which ARE based on time, advancement, and other factors.
While some may be gifted with a high level of skill in a certain area pertaining to a specific game, others might not be, and the 'TIME' invested in developing that skill could be considered a grind. So in a sense, time can be a factor in regards to who is more proficient.
Your 'instant gratification mindset' is a myth. A fallacy. A lie. An untruth. It has nothing to do with what the original poster is asking for.
Actually it's not a myth, but I do agree that it is off topic. I see plenty of gamers of the WOW persuasion complaning about certain MMOs because they don't like the fact that advancement is tied to time or might take a bit more investment than they would like. There is nothing wrong with that though, it's just that they should find a game they like instead of trying to change others to their 'ideal' viewpoint.
People in MMORPGs are mostly 'better' because they've been there longer, or sinking more time into it. We see, in fact, that MMORPG players are the unnatural products of a new generation... a generation that believes that sheer time invested is a more important quality than individual skill.
The original poster never said 'I want a game that rewards me just because I'm playing, right now', but a game that rewards him for SKILL and ability. What's wrong with that? You shouldn't be condescending towards him, that's a PERFECTLY reasonable request.
I do apologize for any offense, but I did state that I didn't mean any offense. I did not mean to be condescending. There isn't anything wrong with wanting a game that rewards the player for skill and ability. However, not all games should be based on that. What he enjoys and what others enjoy may be completely opposite of each other. As I said, it's not fair for one to push their ideas onto the other.
He is insisting that MMOs should be designed without grind, when grind is a very relative thing and inevitable. While you mentioned chess for instance as a game requiring skill, the time spent mastering that skill, some might consider a grind. I believe what the OP is asking for is not realistically feasable. Anything that a person does in a repetative manner, with the objective of reward or achievement, and coupled with lack of desire, is a grind. I don't think any game can be created without the potential of a grind developing, including Pong and similar games.
If I kick total butt in chess, I don't wantt o have to play 500 matches against 3 year olds before they let me play against somebody as good as me... I want to play against people of my own skill level, as quickly as possible, and I want my wins and losses to be solely dependent upon how much I bring to the game. Time should be space for practice, which improves skills, not mostly a method to automatically advance.
I don't disagree with you, except in the instance of an MMO. What you have described for the most part is an FPS, or a twitch based game. People such as myself, enjoy that type of gameplay, but in an FPS. In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to marry that with an MMO, because the end result is not an MMO. It would evolve into a MMOFPS, which is what the majority of opposing posters have stated here. Once again though, there is nothing wrong with that type of game, it's just that you can't remove the potentiallity of grind from progression, especially in an MMO.
I honestly mean no disrespect when I say this, but to some extent, I believe this argument stems from the instant gratificaiton mindset that is predominant in the current generation of gamers. If a game gives a player everything when they start playing, and your not required to 'earn' anything, isn't that game obviously shallow? Even FPS games require players to earn 'unlocks', and that could be considered a grind. I can sympathize with people who don't have large amounts of time to invest in a game that requires a large time investment, but either they will find a way to play that game, or they will find something that fits their lifestyle. It's not really fair to punish players who want a game that takes time to play, and then push out those options in favor of simpler games. However, that doesn't mean that anyone should be required to enjoy repetetive and monotonous quests, but also its important to point out, that is something which is very relative to the individual.
In conclusion, if you strip traditional progression from what is commonly referred to as an MMO (all varieties), what is left to differentiate it from a single player game experience which features an online component, such as Diablo or Starcraft?
---I think you're putting wasted time on a pedestal. The notion of earning a developed character kind of boggles my mind and I don't know how to respond. As if the group of individuals willing to sift through a ton of garbage content should be rewarded with epic, end-game content. Where does the fun factor come from for you? It comes from your experiences with content or competition, which you're mistakingly associating with a journey to a developed character. It's not about the time you put in, but the fun you had. That fun can be had at any level, even without levels.
---It's like talking to a crazy... talk about fair? There are literally no games like what I'm describing, in a genre filled with monotonous time-sinks... I'm sorry to request an end to the monopoly.
---I don't define mmos by progression. Why do you?
I don't disagree with you, but those games are not MMOs (or MMORPGs for those who wish to specific). It's fine to enjoy games that are based upon skill, but is every game required to be based on that? Some of us don't enjoy getting shot in the face repeatedly by 15 year olds who are 'SKILLED' at shooters. Which is exactly why, we choose to play MMOs, which ARE based on time, advancement, and other factors.
There is nothing wrong with that though, it's just that they should find a game they like instead of trying to change others to their 'ideal' viewpoint.
I do apologize for any offense, but I did state that I didn't mean any offense. I did not mean to be condescending. There isn't anything wrong with wanting a game that rewards the player for skill and ability. However, not all games should be based on that. What he enjoys and what others enjoy may be completely opposite of each other. As I said, it's not fair for one to push their ideas onto the other.
He is insisting that MMOs should be designed without grind, when grind is a very relative thing and inevitable. While you mentioned chess for instance as a game requiring skill, the time spent mastering that skill, some might consider a grind. I believe what the OP is asking for is not realistically feasable. Anything that a person does in a repetative manner, with the objective of reward or achievement, and coupled with lack of desire, is a grind. I don't think any game can be created without the potential of a grind developing, including Pong and similar games.
I don't disagree with you, except in the instance of an MMO. What you have described for the most part is an FPS, or a twitch based game. People such as myself, enjoy that type of gameplay, but in an FPS. In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to marry that with an MMO, because the end result is not an MMO. It would evolve into a MMOFPS, which is what the majority of opposing posters have stated here. Once again though, there is nothing wrong with that type of game, it's just that you can't remove the potentiallity of grind from progression, especially in an MMO.
First off, thank you for being polite and apologizing, I do appreciate that! I snipped and cut here and there to try and get to the important parts, but I wanted to point out that first you appear to be confusing 'MMO' with 'MMORPG'. An MMOFPS IS an MMO, it's just not an MMORPG.
Secondly, grind is a relative thing. It is where you find it. The OP (Like me), does not find that improving skills and challenging feels like a grind. That is why he is asking for a game that is skill based, rather than time progression based.
By the way, most intellectual pursuits are skill, rather than time based, so progression through skill (As in Chess, Go, strategy games) is not a matter of twitch exclusively.
He is not insisting that ALL MMOs should be designed without grind, just he wants some marketed to him, without grind. A reasonable request in my opinion.
That was one thing people liked in Guild Wars, which while it wasn't an MMORPG, was as close as you can get without being one. Skill based progression. You hit max level and max level equipment extremely early.
Progression was done sideways, rather than above... you could get more skills, but they weren't BETTER, just different.
You can still have lots of progression within a game, still have RPG flavor... but by allowing one to progress in ways that don't involve bigger numbers.
As mentioned before, Planetside probably the closest thing to this, although it does have levels which are needed to unlock equipment.
If you don't have character advancement, the game is pretty static, and there isn't really anything to differentiate the players that have invested a lot of time, from the player who just started today.
also planetside's world is far from immersive and does not inspire you to explore it.
seems nothing at all like a real world, just a vast arena of possibly randomly generated terrain and bases. so while it TECHnically has a virtual world, it might as well not, cuz it provides none of the draw of one (other than sheer size).
there's no hardwired CHARACTER differentiation. it all becomes actual REAL life differentiation, which is the whole point of what people like us want.
the noob just starting today may be a master of real life skills and be immediately able to fight much better than most of the vets of the game. because he invested time playing games that use REAL LIFE SKILLS as a factor.
that's exactly what we want.
i WANT to be challenged by people new to the game, i don't want to have an easy time by having a CHARACTER advantage just cuz i've played the game longer.
Certain elements, sure. But not entirely because it wouldn't be primarily a first person shooter. The closest combat resembling what I'm trying to describe is savage 2, with a different casting/archery system, similar to Darkfall.
But don't those games still have some kind of grind? Gear, skill levels or something else? That is really not much different.
Guildwars is still the closest I played, little gear or experience grind but some faction and title.
A MMOFPS with no grind would just be a FPS game I fear.
don't overlook the virtual world aspect. that's very significant. i guess its becoming more and more easy to overlook that, because there are so few non-instanced MMOs OF ANY type in todays MMO landscape. ;(
Grind is a state of mind. But a shared and easily recognized grind in the case of mmos. I don't understand what you guise don't get, no levels, no skill levels. Everything "End Game" is available from the beginning. Sure the user can create a "grind" improving their kdr, or win/loss ratio... my goal is to eliminate the deliberately created grinds that make games suck.
I don't really believe most developers set out have grind. I believe they honestly set out to make a game they feel people will enjoy playing and not feel like they are doing anything monotonous. Therefore it is the players that created that grind, that need to repetitvely do something monotonous in order to get something. Yes we all know developers did put the item/action into it but they probably believed it would be enjoyable. As they learn more they try to overcome that lack of knowledge by putting in new activities or making it faster.
But every time you have some sort of progression, you have the opportunity or curse of grind. The player will create it. Therefore you did not eliminate grind, you just are now grinding a different activity. And people will still come on these forms and say the win/loss ratio is a grind, or the kdr is a mindless time sink... nerf it, get rid of it, quit trying to use that as lack of content. True there will be no grind to end game, but as you stated you just swapped it for something else. Anytime there is progression, some player will make a grind. You can't stop that so just make sure you have lots of activities to minimize it.
Get the idea yet.
Hmm I couldn't get this out of the text box so Venge's reply is in blue.
maybe you can get THIS.
nobody talks about old school FPS games or classic 80s arcade games as being grindy or having a grind.
EVERYONE talks about MMOs having it.
really, how can you not understand that the progression mechanics make people do dull repetitive activities that seem like work because they take virtually no skill and only time spent playing?
are grindy games the ONLY kind of games you play?
to not be able to recognize the fundamental difference in character based "progression" games versus real life skill ACTUAL progressing games is......................
Thats fine but it still doesn't beat the argument. If you have progression you have the opportunity/curse of grind.
The only way to get rid of it will be to get rid of progression and even that won't stop it.
One of my favorite games was golden eye, awesome, no progression but way fun especially when playing against my brother. He alway wooped my butt. But after awhile I got bored of it, he still wanted to play, but it was just the same. A repetitive monotonous experience... a grind.
Venge
you never had a real argument.
if you can't recognize the clear differences in character based versus real life skills based game types there's no amount of explaining that will get it across to you. you really even seemed to think that Darkfall was as far away as an MMO could possibly break from the formula which i got quite a bit of amusement out of. 8)
now its SLOWLY starting to dawn on you that we want games WITHOUT character based progression. (yes, levels versus character "skills" really doesn't reduce the grind, as Darkfall proves, and as my ancient signature predicted WAY before it actually came out).
you are of such a different grind-based mindset that you couldn't realize that until just now,
when you should have started getting that idea at around the first post of this thread.
Why would I play this over a good multiplayer FPS?
some people don't care about virtual worlds, so YOU might not care
but for others..........you'd choose it for being populated world where YOU CHOOSE where you wanna be in it.
not these matches with 16 players where you all are shuffled off in synchronicity together from one incontiguous "map" to another.
i really don't know why this isn't glaringly obvious to all the people who constantly tell action lovers to "go play an FPS then".
even after this post was made, people keep asking that same oblivious question.
maybe instead of asking that same question over and over again you should say "what value is there in a virtual world"?
when getting right down to the heart of the matter, MOST of you would PROBABLY see that there is an intrinsic value in THAT ASPECT ALONE and not bother to ask the question.
Thats fine but it still doesn't beat the argument. If you have progression you have the opportunity/curse of grind.
The only way to get rid of it will be to get rid of progression and even that won't stop it.
One of my favorite games was golden eye, awesome, no progression but way fun especially when playing against my brother. He alway wooped my butt. But after awhile I got bored of it, he still wanted to play, but it was just the same. A repetitive monotonous experience... a grind.
Venge
you never had a real argument.
if you can't recognize the clear differences in character based versus real life skills based game types there's no amount of explaining that will get it across to you. you really even seemed to think that Darkfall was as far away as an MMO could possibly break from the formula which i got quite a bit of amusement out of. 8)
now its SLOWLY starting to dawn on you that we want games WITHOUT character based progression. (yes, levels versus character "skills" really doesn't reduce the grind, as Darkfall proves, and as my ancient signature predicted WAY before it actually came out).
you are of such a different grind-based mindset that you couldn't realize that until just now,
when you should have started getting that idea at around the first post of this thread.
I don't see how you can decouple progression and grind. One can't really exist without the other. If we're using the FPS model, and there is no character progression, there is still a grind for kills, prestige, maybe equipment, or even simply bragging rights. I also agree as one previous poster pointed out that grind is a state of mind, but also that the typical "Go kill 10 Rats" type of quest is way over used and a psychological treadmill. However, I don't see how a typical MMO can work without progression.
I honestly mean no disrespect when I say this, but to some extent, I believe this argument stems from the instant gratificaiton mindset that is predominant in the current generation of gamers. If a game gives a player everything when they start playing, and your not required to 'earn' anything, isn't that game obviously shallow? Even FPS games require players to earn 'unlocks', and that could be considered a grind.
i refuse to play those type of FPS games even tho their grinding is LESS than most MMOs. just cuz some of the new FPS games have added MMO style grinding, don't confuse things and think that all the sudden thats now an intrinsic part of every FPS game from this day forward. its just the MMO scourge bleeding out into other genres, and is a disgusting trend IF it ends upchoking out non-grind choices. the way that heavily instanced MMOs have choked out non-instanced virtual worlds.
you are absolutely correct that char progression and time sink activities are intrinsically linked together, and that its key to get rid of char progression.
don't take that in a simple way and think i'm saying ALL MMOS NEED TO DO THAT. but there needs to be at least ONE. and then from there as a whole new audience learns about how MMO games can actually be FUN, from there we can start getting some more fun choices eventually.
"Some of us don't enjoy getting shot in the face repeatedly by 15 year olds who are 'SKILLED' at shooters. Which is exactly why, we choose to play MMOs, which ARE based on time, advancement, and other factors."
You have a higher chance to defeat this skilled guy than a high lvl character with overpowered super duper items....where you dont have even a single chance.
Skill is nonethless the best balanced concept....you can improve your own skill aswell, often with less time than someone who did invest time, time maybe months ahead or which you never can invest.
The concept also lets you have a lot more power over other players, some get attracted to this aswell.
The reason why you find less or almost none grindless action mmorpgs is, that companies make a lot more money with the grind concept. The customer loyality is a lot more easy to reach and to maximum profits with clever marketing and gameplay concepts.
Another point is, that the mmorpg branche did grow up. They all copy the successfull game concepts since it is often a garantee for the buck. A new game concept is always risky and with the current time consuming standard of the games nowadays and probably millions of investements....nobody want to take the risk anymore. And if it is a niche game, it is even harder to survive in this times.
If a game gives a player everything when they start playing, and your not required to 'earn' anything, isn't that game obviously shallow? Even FPS games require players to earn 'unlocks', and that could be considered a grind.
It's not really fair to punish players who want a game that takes time to play, and then push out those options in favor of simpler games.
by that......definition of shallow, all 80s arcade games would be totally mindless and shallow.
and i recognize that probably most people reading this (being an MMO forum afterall, where the grind mindset is so ingrained) will shake their heads vigorously and think...
"duh, they ARE shallow!!!"
this illustrates the totally different mindset grind oriented people have.
everything that has more bulletpoints, more features, more spells, more items, more levels, more points is deemed to have "depth",
and the notion that (for example comparing it to an old school FPS game) a game could POSSIBLY be anything other than shallow when it has "only TEN weapons?!?!" is total heresy.
these sorts of people who no holistic view and understanding of how something "simple" that has a properly simulated game mechanics system.....
(such as an FPS game plotting out projectiles and explosions in 3D space and how they interact with each other, the environment and players, wow, the environment architecture even comes into play!)
....has WAY more depth and replayability than any game that has thousands and thousands of hardwired items & loot tables. by combining simple elements in something inherently much more complicated than standard MMO combat.....
(target abstractly linked to another target, rolling dice against each other to determine what kinda random thing could happen, regardless of the shape of the environment around you)
.....you get all kinds of combinative gameplay that is INHERENTLY much more involved, complicated, and full of variety (and TRUE depth). and THAT is why these kind of real life skill based games don't have grind.
nevermind that all the loot from these grind games are relatively meaninglessly differentiated with slight differences in stat points. but HEY there sure are a GREAT NUMBER OF THEM! ....depth! gotta get 'em all!
some people are dazzled with blatant in-your-face numbers, other people are able to see how there's WAY MORE numbers & factors (that actually PLAY off each other and combine with each other to allow emergent gameplay) that are HIDDEN deep inside properly simulated game mechanics.
which while appearing much more simple ON THE SURFACE, is WAY more in depth in reality. dice were only a reasonable "simulation" with pen & paper based games.
It's not really fair to punish players who want a game that takes time to play, and then push out those options in favor of simpler games.
i'll ignore the "simpler", even tho it has nothing to do with whether a game is grind free or not.
i really don't understand why people want to fight against me having even ONE game that caters to me.
how is that UNFAIR TO YOU? you have almost 400 MMORPGs of your type for you to choose from.
because of how many there are, and the fact they've been around since 1997-1999 you even have GOOD choices to choose from. ones that execute their intention extremely well, with a high level of polish, lots of content, beautiful well designed worlds and are relatively bug free and stable and populated!
i don't even have ONE poorly executed, buggy, poorly designed grind free virtual world to choose from. who's being treated unfairly here. 8)
even something like DCUO that is at least moving in that direction probably has too much for me, cuz i want NONE. probably has a whole host of other problems, but at least its a start going down that path a little. i guess i gotta appreciate ANY strides made in my direction.
I think there's a component to this conversation that's being danced around but not stated very clearly. The theoretical no-grind no-advancement game in question is inherantly PvP only. There's no PvE involved... in fact, there's no meaningful interaction of any kind with the world. You can't be rewarded for doing quests, because that reward would be a form of character progression. You can't be rewarded for killing monsters, gathering reagents, or delivering packages. All of the conventional ways of meaningfully interacting with non-player characters or important locations in the world are gone.
Without any ways of interacting with the world, there's no reason to have it. This game doesn't need a world. What would the purpose be? The game's function would be served just as well by a lobby. Getting warmer... you've played Warcraft or Starcraft, I assume? Street Fighter? DotA? Mario Kart? Yahoo Literati?
You're talking about online multiplayer games. Period. There's nothing about the characters you'd play that would require them to exist as part of a persistant world with cities, citizens, and beasts. You want a game where you can play online against other players on absolutely even ground, with nothing except player skill making the difference. Those exist. Tons of them exist, and have existed for years.
I think there's a component to this conversation that's being danced around but not stated very clearly. The theoretical no-grind no-advancement game in question is inherantly PvP only. There's no PvE involved... in fact, there's no meaningful interaction of any kind with the world. You can't be rewarded for doing quests, because that reward would be a form of character progression. You can't be rewarded for killing monsters, gathering reagents, or delivering packages. All of the conventional ways of meaningfully interacting with non-player characters or important locations in the world are gone.
Without any ways of interacting with the world, there's no reason to have it. This game doesn't need a world. What would the purpose be? The game's function would be served just as well by a lobby. Getting warmer... you've played Warcraft or Starcraft, I assume? Street Fighter? DotA? Mario Kart? Yahoo Literati?
You're talking about online multiplayer games. Period. There's nothing about the characters you'd play that would require them to exist as part of a persistant world with cities, citizens, and beasts. You want a game where you can play online against other players on absolutely even ground, with nothing except player skill making the difference. Those exist. Tons of them exist, and have existed for years.
you're talking about how you have no imagination. period. if it doesn't exist currently, then it never can. because nothing can exist that you're brain can't picture.
so all action games are PVP only eh? that's a pretty bizarre conclusion.
i guess meaningful interaction with the world is sitting on your butt for 5-12 hours at a time in it, clicking on 2 dimensional dialog boxes, and clicking on 2 dimension hotbar buttons as they light up. or dragging around 2 dimensional icons from your inventory and arrange them in yet more 2 dimensional dialog boxes with premade recipes and clicking on 2 dimensionl combine buttons and watching yet another 2 dimensional progress bar show you how much fun you are having waiting for a new 2 dimensional icon to pop up in your inventory.
i guess walking from point A to point B is meaningful to you.
i guess you can't comprehend how being able to defeat a challenging monster is reward in itself because you don't play games that have challenging monsters apparently, which is why you need explicit numbers in your face to tell you exactly how much fun you are having. its so sad to see to see gamers in this state.
yet another person who thinks virtual worlds are pointless, and think that supposed to be a good point.
notice how you bring up characters again...... completely missing the point that SOME PLAYERS DON'T WANT an alternate character, with time based "skills" or levels. we want to be ourselves with our real life skills, doing ACTUAL actions in the game world, having ACTUAL experiences, not reeling in "experience" points in exchange for wasting our lives away.
re-read everything and actually think about it and make an attempt to understand how somebody can have a different point of view than you and different tastes than you, then see if you can come up with any point.
______________________________________ Play my entire game FREE if you want
What would the purpose be? The game's function would be served just as well by a lobby. Getting warmer... you've played Warcraft or Starcraft, I assume? Street Fighter? DotA? Mario Kart? Yahoo Literati?
your favorite games function would be served just as well by punching yourself in the face every 5 minutes for hours on end.
see how ridiculous it sounds to tell somebody else what would serve their purpose best?
you think i'm just pretending to like virtual worlds?
______________________________________ Play my entire game FREE if you want
you've played Warcraft or Starcraft, I assume? Street Fighter? DotA? Mario Kart? Yahoo Literati?
You're talking about online multiplayer games. Period. There's nothing about the characters you'd play that would require them to exist as part of a persistant world with cities, citizens, and beasts.
You want a game where you can play online against other players on absolutely even ground, with nothing except player skill making the difference. Those exist. Tons of them exist, and have existed for years.
i've never played those style of games set in a virtual world. that's the problem. they don't exist.
only grindy MMOs currently exist.
now after about hundred posts maybe you can finally understand that simple concept? but then it sounds like you really didn't read much if any of them.
thanks for informing me that online multiplayer games exist and have existed for years. i've been playing games since i was 11, which is now some 30 years, and somehow i managed to never hear of them. i guess i'll have to look into these new fangled so-called "online multiplayer games".....
...... now, can we get back on topic? please pay attention to what people are saying in this thread.
______________________________________ Play my entire game FREE if you want
Originally posted by Disdena I think there's a component to this conversation that's being danced around but not stated very clearly. The theoretical no-grind no-advancement game in question is inherantly PvP only. There's no PvE involved... in fact, there's no meaningful interaction of any kind with the world. You can't be rewarded for doing quests, because that reward would be a form of character progression. You can't be rewarded for killing monsters, gathering reagents, or delivering packages. All of the conventional ways of meaningfully interacting with non-player characters or important locations in the world are gone. Without any ways of interacting with the world, there's no reason to have it. This game doesn't need a world. What would the purpose be? The game's function would be served just as well by a lobby. Getting warmer... you've played Warcraft or Starcraft, I assume? Street Fighter? DotA? Mario Kart? Yahoo Literati? You're talking about online multiplayer games. Period. There's nothing about the characters you'd play that would require them to exist as part of a persistant world with cities, citizens, and beasts. You want a game where you can play online against other players on absolutely even ground, with nothing except player skill making the difference. Those exist. Tons of them exist, and have existed for years.
you're talking about how you have no imagination. period. if it doesn't exist currently, then it never can. because nothing can exist that you're brain can't picture. so all action games are PVP only eh? that's a pretty bizarre conclusion. i guess meaningful interaction with the world is sitting on your butt for 5-12 hours at a time in it, clicking on 2 dimensional dialog boxes, and clicking on 2 dimension hotbar buttons as they light up. or dragging around 2 dimensional icons from your inventory and arrange them in yet more 2 dimensional dialog boxes with premade recipes and clicking on 2 dimensionl combine buttons and watching yet another 2 dimensional progress bar show you how much fun you are having waiting for a new 2 dimensional icon to pop up in your inventory. i guess walking from point A to point B is meaningful to you. i guess you can't comprehend how being able to defeat a challenging monster is reward in itself because you don't play games that have challenging monsters apparently, which is why you need explicit numbers in your face to tell you exactly how much fun you are having. its so sad to see to see gamers in this state. yet another person who thinks virtual worlds are pointless, and think that supposed to be a good point.
notice how you bring up characters again...... completely missing the point that SOME PLAYERS DON'T WANT an alternate character, with time based "skills" or levels. we want to be ourselves with our real life skills, doing ACTUAL actions in the game world, having ACTUAL experiences, not reeling in "experience" points in exchange for wasting our lives away. re-read everything and actually think about it and make an attempt to understand how somebody can have a different point of view than you and different tastes than you, then see if you can come up with any point.
There may not need to be in game rewards for beating npc mobs, but there has to be a financial reward for the company delivering the software. The 'virtual world' thing doesn't pay well. Second Life only works because a bunch of people, not the developer are making content. If the Second Life developer had to make all the content, they'd go bankrupt trying to pay for developers and designers to make it.
In short, you couldn't write and program a virtual world right now and expect to actually make money off of it. The development costs are too high. Either the development costs have to drop or the market needs to suddenly shift to people willing to pay to live out virtual lives instead of play games in virtual playgrounds.
* edit * There's other stuff. For instance, if there's no loot reward for beating a tough monster, then that monster needs to be really tough so that the bragging rights are worth bragging with. If it's really tough, few people will actually beat it. It would be like me trying to fight Mike Tyson. There's no point. Sure, I could go beat all the easy monsters, but I'm getting nothing for it, so why do that? Giving people virtual rewards for their virtual accomplishments works. That's why they use it.
Not saying you couldn't do something else, but so far, nobody has thought of anything else, so nobody is using anything else.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
There may not need to be in game rewards for beating npc mobs, but there has to be a financial reward for the company delivering the software. The 'virtual world' thing doesn't pay well. Second Life only works because a bunch of people, not the developer are making content. If the Second Life developer had to make all the content, they'd go bankrupt trying to pay for developers and designers to make it.
In short, you couldn't write and program a virtual world right now and expect to actually make money off of it. The development costs are too high. Either the development costs have to drop or the market needs to suddenly shift to people willing to pay to live out virtual lives instead of play games in virtual playgrounds.
* edit * There's other stuff. For instance, if there's no loot reward for beating a tough monster, then that monster needs to be really tough so that the bragging rights are worth bragging with. If it's really tough, few people will actually beat it. It would be like me trying to fight Mike Tyson. There's no point. Sure, I could go beat all the easy monsters, but I'm getting nothing for it, so why do that? Giving people virtual rewards for their virtual accomplishments works. That's why they use it.
Not saying you couldn't do something else, but so far, nobody has thought of anything else, so nobody is using anything else.
nobody knows if a gamey virtual world couldn't make money until several are put on the market. and so far we don't have even one (of the type i'm waiting for).
also nothing is stopping one from being UGC based ala Second Life. as a matter of fact, my longterm goal in life is to make exactly that. the UGC would be handled entirely differently, as well as many things about it. i wouldn't wanna restrict world building to only paying users. and further restrict THOSE users to only to certain plots of land for example. free labour would be freely encouraged instead of CHARGING people to make my content like SL does. and they would be able to make imrovements to the WHOLE world. also, crappy designers wouldn't be guaranteed of having ANY of their work in-game. think of BBSes, youtube or any other UGC based system for clues on how that can be managed, altho i have further ideas as well.
i'm not against loot or in-game rewards (altho i don't think they are NECESSARY). i'm specifically against experience points, levels and "skills". which are trying to "simulate" a character that is supposed to be seperate and distinct from your real life self (and yet never really is). you can still role play if you wish in a game without RPG mechanics, as games like Second Life (which has none) demonstrates. for many that's the whole point of SL.
______________________________________ Play my entire game FREE if you want
It's worth pointing out that Puzzle Pirates has already done this, really. It's a skill based, not leveling based MMORPG. There's money you can earn, but it mostly seems to apply to fashion stylings.
The more you fight, the higher you're ranked overall, but it's ranking you based off of how skillfully you have been performing the puzzles.
The only problem with Puzzle Pirates of course is that it's not so good if you don't want to play puzzle games all day long.
Comments
Let's look at some old games, shall we?
Let's start early. Pong. Pong is a game with total instant gratification. You sit down, you play, there is no imbalance at all, everything is reliant upon skill.
How about Pacman? Donkey Kong? Mario Bros.? How about fighting games? Old style FPSs? (Quake, Doom, Unreal Tournament and so on) Platformers? Puzzlers? Older driving games? (Outrun, anything pre-Gran Turismo, really.) Lightgun games?
Heck, let's look at games in the form of sports. Football? Basketball? Volleyball?
How about board games? Chess for example?
All of these have one thing in common. The dividing factor is SKILL. Skill can be gained through time, but it is not time itself that divides the good from the bad.
Your 'instant gratification mindset' is a myth. A fallacy. A lie. An untruth. It has nothing to do with what the original poster is asking for.
In fact, you can see that MMORPGs... descended from CRPGs, descended from RPGs... have a thoroughly unnatural method of advancement in a game that supplants skill in many cases. Time. Not skill, not the feeling of 'This person is better', but seniority.
People in MMORPGs are mostly 'better' because they've been there longer, or sinking more time into it. We see, in fact, that MMORPG players are the unnatural products of a new generation... a generation that believes that sheer time invested is a more important quality than individual skill.
The original poster never said 'I want a game that rewards me just because I'm playing, right now', but a game that rewards him for SKILL and ability. What's wrong with that? You shouldn't be condescending towards him, that's a PERFECTLY reasonable request.
If I kick total butt in chess, I don't wantt o have to play 500 matches against 3 year olds before they let me play against somebody as good as me... I want to play against people of my own skill level, as quickly as possible, and I want my wins and losses to be solely dependent upon how much I bring to the game. Time should be space for practice, which improves skills, not mostly a method to automatically advance.
First of all, I think your taking one statement a bit out of context. But anyway...
Let's look at some old games, shall we?
Let's start early. Pong. Pong is a game with total instant gratification. You sit down, you play, there is no imbalance at all, everything is reliant upon skill.
How about Pacman? Donkey Kong? Mario Bros.? How about fighting games? Old style FPSs? (Quake, Doom, Unreal Tournament and so on) Platformers? Puzzlers? Older driving games? (Outrun, anything pre-Gran Turismo, really.) Lightgun games?
Heck, let's look at games in the form of sports. Football? Basketball? Volleyball?
How about board games? Chess for example?
All of these have one thing in common. The dividing factor is SKILL. Skill can be gained through time, but it is not time itself that divides the good from the bad.
I don't disagree with you, but those games are not MMOs (or MMORPGs for those who wish to specific). It's fine to enjoy games that are based upon skill, but is every game required to be based on that? Some of us don't enjoy getting shot in the face repeatedly by 15 year olds who are 'SKILLED' at shooters. Which is exactly why, we choose to play MMOs, which ARE based on time, advancement, and other factors.
While some may be gifted with a high level of skill in a certain area pertaining to a specific game, others might not be, and the 'TIME' invested in developing that skill could be considered a grind. So in a sense, time can be a factor in regards to who is more proficient.
Your 'instant gratification mindset' is a myth. A fallacy. A lie. An untruth. It has nothing to do with what the original poster is asking for.
Actually it's not a myth, but I do agree that it is off topic. I see plenty of gamers of the WOW persuasion complaning about certain MMOs because they don't like the fact that advancement is tied to time or might take a bit more investment than they would like. There is nothing wrong with that though, it's just that they should find a game they like instead of trying to change others to their 'ideal' viewpoint.
People in MMORPGs are mostly 'better' because they've been there longer, or sinking more time into it. We see, in fact, that MMORPG players are the unnatural products of a new generation... a generation that believes that sheer time invested is a more important quality than individual skill.
The original poster never said 'I want a game that rewards me just because I'm playing, right now', but a game that rewards him for SKILL and ability. What's wrong with that? You shouldn't be condescending towards him, that's a PERFECTLY reasonable request.
I do apologize for any offense, but I did state that I didn't mean any offense. I did not mean to be condescending. There isn't anything wrong with wanting a game that rewards the player for skill and ability. However, not all games should be based on that. What he enjoys and what others enjoy may be completely opposite of each other. As I said, it's not fair for one to push their ideas onto the other.
He is insisting that MMOs should be designed without grind, when grind is a very relative thing and inevitable. While you mentioned chess for instance as a game requiring skill, the time spent mastering that skill, some might consider a grind. I believe what the OP is asking for is not realistically feasable. Anything that a person does in a repetative manner, with the objective of reward or achievement, and coupled with lack of desire, is a grind. I don't think any game can be created without the potential of a grind developing, including Pong and similar games.
If I kick total butt in chess, I don't wantt o have to play 500 matches against 3 year olds before they let me play against somebody as good as me... I want to play against people of my own skill level, as quickly as possible, and I want my wins and losses to be solely dependent upon how much I bring to the game. Time should be space for practice, which improves skills, not mostly a method to automatically advance.
I don't disagree with you, except in the instance of an MMO. What you have described for the most part is an FPS, or a twitch based game. People such as myself, enjoy that type of gameplay, but in an FPS. In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to marry that with an MMO, because the end result is not an MMO. It would evolve into a MMOFPS, which is what the majority of opposing posters have stated here. Once again though, there is nothing wrong with that type of game, it's just that you can't remove the potentiallity of grind from progression, especially in an MMO.
---I think you're putting wasted time on a pedestal. The notion of earning a developed character kind of boggles my mind and I don't know how to respond. As if the group of individuals willing to sift through a ton of garbage content should be rewarded with epic, end-game content. Where does the fun factor come from for you? It comes from your experiences with content or competition, which you're mistakingly associating with a journey to a developed character. It's not about the time you put in, but the fun you had. That fun can be had at any level, even without levels.
---It's like talking to a crazy... talk about fair? There are literally no games like what I'm describing, in a genre filled with monotonous time-sinks... I'm sorry to request an end to the monopoly.
---I don't define mmos by progression. Why do you?
First off, thank you for being polite and apologizing, I do appreciate that! I snipped and cut here and there to try and get to the important parts, but I wanted to point out that first you appear to be confusing 'MMO' with 'MMORPG'. An MMOFPS IS an MMO, it's just not an MMORPG.
Secondly, grind is a relative thing. It is where you find it. The OP (Like me), does not find that improving skills and challenging feels like a grind. That is why he is asking for a game that is skill based, rather than time progression based.
By the way, most intellectual pursuits are skill, rather than time based, so progression through skill (As in Chess, Go, strategy games) is not a matter of twitch exclusively.
He is not insisting that ALL MMOs should be designed without grind, just he wants some marketed to him, without grind. A reasonable request in my opinion.
That was one thing people liked in Guild Wars, which while it wasn't an MMORPG, was as close as you can get without being one. Skill based progression. You hit max level and max level equipment extremely early.
Progression was done sideways, rather than above... you could get more skills, but they weren't BETTER, just different.
You can still have lots of progression within a game, still have RPG flavor... but by allowing one to progress in ways that don't involve bigger numbers.
also planetside's world is far from immersive and does not inspire you to explore it.
seems nothing at all like a real world, just a vast arena of possibly randomly generated terrain and bases. so while it TECHnically has a virtual world, it might as well not, cuz it provides none of the draw of one (other than sheer size).
there's no hardwired CHARACTER differentiation. it all becomes actual REAL life differentiation, which is the whole point of what people like us want.
the noob just starting today may be a master of real life skills and be immediately able to fight much better than most of the vets of the game. because he invested time playing games that use REAL LIFE SKILLS as a factor.
that's exactly what we want.
i WANT to be challenged by people new to the game, i don't want to have an easy time by having a CHARACTER advantage just cuz i've played the game longer.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
don't overlook the virtual world aspect. that's very significant. i guess its becoming more and more easy to overlook that, because there are so few non-instanced MMOs OF ANY type in todays MMO landscape. ;(
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
maybe you can get THIS.
nobody talks about old school FPS games or classic 80s arcade games as being grindy or having a grind.
EVERYONE talks about MMOs having it.
really, how can you not understand that the progression mechanics make people do dull repetitive activities that seem like work because they take virtually no skill and only time spent playing?
are grindy games the ONLY kind of games you play?
to not be able to recognize the fundamental difference in character based "progression" games versus real life skill ACTUAL progressing games is......................
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
you never had a real argument.
if you can't recognize the clear differences in character based versus real life skills based game types there's no amount of explaining that will get it across to you. you really even seemed to think that Darkfall was as far away as an MMO could possibly break from the formula which i got quite a bit of amusement out of. 8)
now its SLOWLY starting to dawn on you that we want games WITHOUT character based progression. (yes, levels versus character "skills" really doesn't reduce the grind, as Darkfall proves, and as my ancient signature predicted WAY before it actually came out).
you are of such a different grind-based mindset that you couldn't realize that until just now,
when you should have started getting that idea at around the first post of this thread.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
even after this post was made, people keep asking that same oblivious question.
maybe instead of asking that same question over and over again you should say "what value is there in a virtual world"?
when getting right down to the heart of the matter, MOST of you would PROBABLY see that there is an intrinsic value in THAT ASPECT ALONE and not bother to ask the question.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
This man is on my page.
I feel like real life is like a grind....
Well, yeah, but lets not get in to how bankers, big business and the state are enslaving us. Baby steps, baby steps.
i refuse to play those type of FPS games even tho their grinding is LESS than most MMOs. just cuz some of the new FPS games have added MMO style grinding, don't confuse things and think that all the sudden thats now an intrinsic part of every FPS game from this day forward. its just the MMO scourge bleeding out into other genres, and is a disgusting trend IF it ends upchoking out non-grind choices. the way that heavily instanced MMOs have choked out non-instanced virtual worlds.
you are absolutely correct that char progression and time sink activities are intrinsically linked together, and that its key to get rid of char progression.
don't take that in a simple way and think i'm saying ALL MMOS NEED TO DO THAT. but there needs to be at least ONE. and then from there as a whole new audience learns about how MMO games can actually be FUN, from there we can start getting some more fun choices eventually.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
"Some of us don't enjoy getting shot in the face repeatedly by 15 year olds who are 'SKILLED' at shooters. Which is exactly why, we choose to play MMOs, which ARE based on time, advancement, and other factors."
You have a higher chance to defeat this skilled guy than a high lvl character with overpowered super duper items....where you dont have even a single chance.
Skill is nonethless the best balanced concept....you can improve your own skill aswell, often with less time than someone who did invest time, time maybe months ahead or which you never can invest.
The concept also lets you have a lot more power over other players, some get attracted to this aswell.
The reason why you find less or almost none grindless action mmorpgs is, that companies make a lot more money with the grind concept. The customer loyality is a lot more easy to reach and to maximum profits with clever marketing and gameplay concepts.
Another point is, that the mmorpg branche did grow up. They all copy the successfull game concepts since it is often a garantee for the buck. A new game concept is always risky and with the current time consuming standard of the games nowadays and probably millions of investements....nobody want to take the risk anymore. And if it is a niche game, it is even harder to survive in this times.
by that......definition of shallow, all 80s arcade games would be totally mindless and shallow.
and i recognize that probably most people reading this (being an MMO forum afterall, where the grind mindset is so ingrained) will shake their heads vigorously and think...
"duh, they ARE shallow!!!"
this illustrates the totally different mindset grind oriented people have.
everything that has more bulletpoints, more features, more spells, more items, more levels, more points is deemed to have "depth",
and the notion that (for example comparing it to an old school FPS game) a game could POSSIBLY be anything other than shallow when it has "only TEN weapons?!?!" is total heresy.
these sorts of people who no holistic view and understanding of how something "simple" that has a properly simulated game mechanics system.....
(such as an FPS game plotting out projectiles and explosions in 3D space and how they interact with each other, the environment and players, wow, the environment architecture even comes into play!)
....has WAY more depth and replayability than any game that has thousands and thousands of hardwired items & loot tables. by combining simple elements in something inherently much more complicated than standard MMO combat.....
(target abstractly linked to another target, rolling dice against each other to determine what kinda random thing could happen, regardless of the shape of the environment around you)
.....you get all kinds of combinative gameplay that is INHERENTLY much more involved, complicated, and full of variety (and TRUE depth). and THAT is why these kind of real life skill based games don't have grind.
nevermind that all the loot from these grind games are relatively meaninglessly differentiated with slight differences in stat points. but HEY there sure are a GREAT NUMBER OF THEM! ....depth! gotta get 'em all!
some people are dazzled with blatant in-your-face numbers, other people are able to see how there's WAY MORE numbers & factors (that actually PLAY off each other and combine with each other to allow emergent gameplay) that are HIDDEN deep inside properly simulated game mechanics.
which while appearing much more simple ON THE SURFACE, is WAY more in depth in reality. dice were only a reasonable "simulation" with pen & paper based games.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
i'll ignore the "simpler", even tho it has nothing to do with whether a game is grind free or not.
i really don't understand why people want to fight against me having even ONE game that caters to me.
how is that UNFAIR TO YOU? you have almost 400 MMORPGs of your type for you to choose from.
because of how many there are, and the fact they've been around since 1997-1999 you even have GOOD choices to choose from. ones that execute their intention extremely well, with a high level of polish, lots of content, beautiful well designed worlds and are relatively bug free and stable and populated!
i don't even have ONE poorly executed, buggy, poorly designed grind free virtual world to choose from. who's being treated unfairly here. 8)
even something like DCUO that is at least moving in that direction probably has too much for me, cuz i want NONE. probably has a whole host of other problems, but at least its a start going down that path a little. i guess i gotta appreciate ANY strides made in my direction.
---------------------------
Corpus Callosum
---------------------------
Thanks for the responses corpusc, we seem to be in a very similar mindset. I knew I wasn't alone.
I'm... of a related mindset! Maybe not as extreme as you two.
I think there's a component to this conversation that's being danced around but not stated very clearly. The theoretical no-grind no-advancement game in question is inherantly PvP only. There's no PvE involved... in fact, there's no meaningful interaction of any kind with the world. You can't be rewarded for doing quests, because that reward would be a form of character progression. You can't be rewarded for killing monsters, gathering reagents, or delivering packages. All of the conventional ways of meaningfully interacting with non-player characters or important locations in the world are gone.
Without any ways of interacting with the world, there's no reason to have it. This game doesn't need a world. What would the purpose be? The game's function would be served just as well by a lobby. Getting warmer... you've played Warcraft or Starcraft, I assume? Street Fighter? DotA? Mario Kart? Yahoo Literati?
You're talking about online multiplayer games. Period. There's nothing about the characters you'd play that would require them to exist as part of a persistant world with cities, citizens, and beasts. You want a game where you can play online against other players on absolutely even ground, with nothing except player skill making the difference. Those exist. Tons of them exist, and have existed for years.
you're talking about how you have no imagination. period. if it doesn't exist currently, then it never can. because nothing can exist that you're brain can't picture.
so all action games are PVP only eh? that's a pretty bizarre conclusion.
i guess meaningful interaction with the world is sitting on your butt for 5-12 hours at a time in it, clicking on 2 dimensional dialog boxes, and clicking on 2 dimension hotbar buttons as they light up. or dragging around 2 dimensional icons from your inventory and arrange them in yet more 2 dimensional dialog boxes with premade recipes and clicking on 2 dimensionl combine buttons and watching yet another 2 dimensional progress bar show you how much fun you are having waiting for a new 2 dimensional icon to pop up in your inventory.
i guess walking from point A to point B is meaningful to you.
i guess you can't comprehend how being able to defeat a challenging monster is reward in itself because you don't play games that have challenging monsters apparently, which is why you need explicit numbers in your face to tell you exactly how much fun you are having. its so sad to see to see gamers in this state.
yet another person who thinks virtual worlds are pointless, and think that supposed to be a good point.
notice how you bring up characters again...... completely missing the point that SOME PLAYERS DON'T WANT an alternate character, with time based "skills" or levels. we want to be ourselves with our real life skills, doing ACTUAL actions in the game world, having ACTUAL experiences, not reeling in "experience" points in exchange for wasting our lives away.
re-read everything and actually think about it and make an attempt to understand how somebody can have a different point of view than you and different tastes than you, then see if you can come up with any point.
______________________________________
Play my entire game FREE if you want
http://PlayRealNotes.com
your favorite games function would be served just as well by punching yourself in the face every 5 minutes for hours on end.
see how ridiculous it sounds to tell somebody else what would serve their purpose best?
you think i'm just pretending to like virtual worlds?
______________________________________
Play my entire game FREE if you want
http://PlayRealNotes.com
i've never played those style of games set in a virtual world. that's the problem. they don't exist.
only grindy MMOs currently exist.
now after about hundred posts maybe you can finally understand that simple concept? but then it sounds like you really didn't read much if any of them.
thanks for informing me that online multiplayer games exist and have existed for years. i've been playing games since i was 11, which is now some 30 years, and somehow i managed to never hear of them. i guess i'll have to look into these new fangled so-called "online multiplayer games".....
...... now, can we get back on topic? please pay attention to what people are saying in this thread.
______________________________________
Play my entire game FREE if you want
http://PlayRealNotes.com
There may not need to be in game rewards for beating npc mobs, but there has to be a financial reward for the company delivering the software. The 'virtual world' thing doesn't pay well. Second Life only works because a bunch of people, not the developer are making content. If the Second Life developer had to make all the content, they'd go bankrupt trying to pay for developers and designers to make it.
In short, you couldn't write and program a virtual world right now and expect to actually make money off of it. The development costs are too high. Either the development costs have to drop or the market needs to suddenly shift to people willing to pay to live out virtual lives instead of play games in virtual playgrounds.
* edit * There's other stuff. For instance, if there's no loot reward for beating a tough monster, then that monster needs to be really tough so that the bragging rights are worth bragging with. If it's really tough, few people will actually beat it. It would be like me trying to fight Mike Tyson. There's no point. Sure, I could go beat all the easy monsters, but I'm getting nothing for it, so why do that? Giving people virtual rewards for their virtual accomplishments works. That's why they use it.
Not saying you couldn't do something else, but so far, nobody has thought of anything else, so nobody is using anything else.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
nobody knows if a gamey virtual world couldn't make money until several are put on the market. and so far we don't have even one (of the type i'm waiting for).
also nothing is stopping one from being UGC based ala Second Life. as a matter of fact, my longterm goal in life is to make exactly that. the UGC would be handled entirely differently, as well as many things about it. i wouldn't wanna restrict world building to only paying users. and further restrict THOSE users to only to certain plots of land for example. free labour would be freely encouraged instead of CHARGING people to make my content like SL does. and they would be able to make imrovements to the WHOLE world. also, crappy designers wouldn't be guaranteed of having ANY of their work in-game. think of BBSes, youtube or any other UGC based system for clues on how that can be managed, altho i have further ideas as well.
i'm not against loot or in-game rewards (altho i don't think they are NECESSARY). i'm specifically against experience points, levels and "skills". which are trying to "simulate" a character that is supposed to be seperate and distinct from your real life self (and yet never really is). you can still role play if you wish in a game without RPG mechanics, as games like Second Life (which has none) demonstrates. for many that's the whole point of SL.
______________________________________
Play my entire game FREE if you want
http://PlayRealNotes.com
It's worth pointing out that Puzzle Pirates has already done this, really. It's a skill based, not leveling based MMORPG. There's money you can earn, but it mostly seems to apply to fashion stylings.
The more you fight, the higher you're ranked overall, but it's ranking you based off of how skillfully you have been performing the puzzles.
The only problem with Puzzle Pirates of course is that it's not so good if you don't want to play puzzle games all day long.