If you managed to (a) reach the actual end of the game (maxed out every slot), (b) without being in the upper 1% percentile of players in terms of time investment, and (c) done it all inside 1-2 months, then I feel a MMORPG is deserving of criticism that it lacks content.
Otherwise, nothing is wrong. You've just reached the next phase of the game. Reaching max level isn't "completing the game" anymore. It's been a loong time since that was true.
True, and also not true. Is time really the determining factor?
Some would say its about the journey not the destination.
I assume from the title that you're referring mostly to DCUO?
Either way, I don't see how "levels" are the culprit, here. How is a skill system any better than a level system if you can get to the max skill level in a week?
The problem isn't in the system, it's in the lack of content.
With a skill-based game it allows new players to play with vets. Sure, it means they'd die a lot easier, or do less damage.. but there are far less barriers to entry. When I played Darkfall on day 1 I was grouping with people with 70-80% on skills in places that would destroy me solo if i even looked at them the wrong way.
That's impossible to do in level-based theme-park games.. no way can you run into even a lvl 20 instance at level 10 and expect to do anything apart from die.
I guess the solution is three-fold.. introduce a LOT of content, make it challenging, and lastly, make sure the game has enough people around to make it less of a wasteland in between levels.
You dont understand me, I don't want to grind my way to end game, I want to truly enjoy the content on my way there, the people I play with, the game in general, I want an experience I can remember.
FFXI, it forced grouping, you could grab maybe 3 levels a day if you where lucky, more if you went overboard. But in the face of all that grinding (grinding without quests) it was still a way more enjoyable experience. Ive maxed in several games now, and only EQ and FFXI can I pull up dozens of points in leveling my characters that I remember, still.
6 years ago it was, and I can still name people who I met in valkurm dunes, the places I leveled with groups.
I just finished Rift and even getting level 50 is getting fuzzy, I made few friends, I grouped for instances and warfronts, but didn't make any lasting contacts, went through soloing, doing loads of quests. I experienced everything the game had to offer and i worked towards that carrot that was end game.
Themeparks aren't even good themeparks anymore, its all fight your way through generic quests, boring instances with lame boss mechanics that have been done a thousand times, enter a generic fight with opposite faction, get points and exp, do more quest solo, rinse repeat until end game. Do warfronts and do heroics/experts grind for gear, sit atop your mountain singing about being awesome, level an alt, do it again.
He is 100% right. Thats why I even didnt bother to start rift. People that dont understand what he is talking about, just never had a good mmo experience. I miss my time at daoc...
With a skill-based game it allows new players to play with vets. Sure, it means they'd die a lot easier, or do less damage.. but there are far less barriers to entry. When I played Darkfall on day 1 I was grouping with people with 70-80% on skills in places that would destroy me solo if i even looked at them the wrong way.
That's impossible to do in level-based theme-park games.. no way can you run into even a lvl 20 instance at level 10 and expect to do anything apart from die.
I guess the solution is three-fold.. introduce a LOT of content, make it challenging, and lastly, make sure the game has enough people around to make it less of a wasteland in between levels.
You're a little confused/underinformed.
It's completely possible in level-based themepark games. In fact, CoX does it. (Low levels sidekick to high ones.)
It's not a skill system, but Level scaling and Zergability that determine whether or not you can bring newbies into high level places. If the to-hit system of WOW didn't scale exponentially as a mob's level increases relative to your own, you could zerg world bosses with tons of level 1s.
You wouldn't want to, because it's underrewarded. It's underrewarded because it's not really strongly desired gameplay to simply spam players at problems; zerging everything down is inherently not very interesting.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
With a skill-based game it allows new players to play with vets. Sure, it means they'd die a lot easier, or do less damage.. but there are far less barriers to entry. When I played Darkfall on day 1 I was grouping with people with 70-80% on skills in places that would destroy me solo if i even looked at them the wrong way.
That's impossible to do in level-based theme-park games.. no way can you run into even a lvl 20 instance at level 10 and expect to do anything apart from die.
I guess the solution is three-fold.. introduce a LOT of content, make it challenging, and lastly, make sure the game has enough people around to make it less of a wasteland in between levels.
You're a little confused/underinformed.
It's completely possible in level-based themepark games. In fact, CoX does it. (Low levels sidekick to high ones.)
It's not a skill system, but Level scaling and Zergability that determine whether or not you can bring newbies into high level places. If the to-hit system of WOW didn't scale exponentially as a mob's level increases relative to your own, you could zerg world bosses with tons of level 1s.
You wouldn't want to, because it's underrewarded. It's underrewarded because it's not really strongly desired gameplay to simply spam players at problems; zerging everything down is inherently not very interesting.
It's to get the big bucks from the console kiddies who want games with a big "I WIN" button in the middle of the screen. They love to look big, uber and menacing, and because they are simplistic gamers who lack depth and imagination, they find the mindless grind absolutely perfect for them. The console kiddies think they're "hardcore gamers" (AKA: grind-humpers) and the MMO companies rake in more cash per year than some small nations make.
Everyone else HATES games like that, as do I, but we're outnumbered by about 100 to 1.
Wow, I must be doing it wrong... I've been playing Rift almost every day (from 10 minutes to 4 or 5 hours) since day 1 of the head start and I'm only 26 on 1 character and 13 on another.
I am, however, having the most fun I have had in an MMO game since DAOC.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
I think this is easy to break down, there three broad brackets here,
1) Grinding with good content (so it doesn't feel like a grind)
2) Grdinding with little content (hopefully something in the game makes up for it)
3) Fast leveling with variable content
No game (that I know of) can be in more then 1 of these, rift is number 3. Personally not my kind of game Rift (not due to quick leveling I still love GW1, other reasons) but you should have realised what kind of game it was before you bought it.
I think this is easy to break down, there three broad brackets here,
1) Grinding with good content (so it doesn't feel like a grind)
2) Grdinding with little content (hopefully something in the game makes up for it)
3) Fast leveling with variable content
No game (that I know of) can be in more then 1 of these, rift is number 3. Personally not my kind of game Rift (not due to quick leveling I still love GW1, other reasons) but you should have realised what kind of game it was before you bought it.
I'd change it a little bit:
1) Playing through diversified content
2) Playing through repetitive content
The distinction of whether something is grind or not isn't the amount of content or the time needed, but the nature of content. Even the most elaborate, innovative and immersive activity becomes boring if it is repeated too much without any alternatives. It also means 3) only works if variable content means "variable in it's nature" not just in the time or place where it happens.
Comments
True, and also not true. Is time really the determining factor?
Some would say its about the journey not the destination.
Well said Robsolf!
THAT is the REAL issue these days.
With a skill-based game it allows new players to play with vets. Sure, it means they'd die a lot easier, or do less damage.. but there are far less barriers to entry. When I played Darkfall on day 1 I was grouping with people with 70-80% on skills in places that would destroy me solo if i even looked at them the wrong way.
That's impossible to do in level-based theme-park games.. no way can you run into even a lvl 20 instance at level 10 and expect to do anything apart from die.
I guess the solution is three-fold.. introduce a LOT of content, make it challenging, and lastly, make sure the game has enough people around to make it less of a wasteland in between levels.
Autofire
He is 100% right. Thats why I even didnt bother to start rift. People that dont understand what he is talking about, just never had a good mmo experience. I miss my time at daoc...
You're a little confused/underinformed.
It's completely possible in level-based themepark games. In fact, CoX does it. (Low levels sidekick to high ones.)
It's not a skill system, but Level scaling and Zergability that determine whether or not you can bring newbies into high level places. If the to-hit system of WOW didn't scale exponentially as a mob's level increases relative to your own, you could zerg world bosses with tons of level 1s.
You wouldn't want to, because it's underrewarded. It's underrewarded because it's not really strongly desired gameplay to simply spam players at problems; zerging everything down is inherently not very interesting.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
http://www.gamebreaker.tv/legendary-afterparty-300-naked-orcs-down-gamon/
I wouldn't say its a world boss but a bunch of level 1s down a level 85 elite.
It's to get the big bucks from the console kiddies who want games with a big "I WIN" button in the middle of the screen. They love to look big, uber and menacing, and because they are simplistic gamers who lack depth and imagination, they find the mindless grind absolutely perfect for them. The console kiddies think they're "hardcore gamers" (AKA: grind-humpers) and the MMO companies rake in more cash per year than some small nations make.
Everyone else HATES games like that, as do I, but we're outnumbered by about 100 to 1.
Then play Guild Wars.
Wow, I must be doing it wrong... I've been playing Rift almost every day (from 10 minutes to 4 or 5 hours) since day 1 of the head start and I'm only 26 on 1 character and 13 on another.
I am, however, having the most fun I have had in an MMO game since DAOC.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
I think this is easy to break down, there three broad brackets here,
1) Grinding with good content (so it doesn't feel like a grind)
2) Grdinding with little content (hopefully something in the game makes up for it)
3) Fast leveling with variable content
No game (that I know of) can be in more then 1 of these, rift is number 3. Personally not my kind of game Rift (not due to quick leveling I still love GW1, other reasons) but you should have realised what kind of game it was before you bought it.
Healing the world since 2005
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
I'd change it a little bit:
1) Playing through diversified content
2) Playing through repetitive content
The distinction of whether something is grind or not isn't the amount of content or the time needed, but the nature of content. Even the most elaborate, innovative and immersive activity becomes boring if it is repeated too much without any alternatives. It also means 3) only works if variable content means "variable in it's nature" not just in the time or place where it happens.