Sorry Frozt but I think you incredibly misunderstood a lot of what I said or took what I said to the extreme. Now I agree that WoW encouraged quest grinding at the begining of a character's life but there were other possible ways to gain xp like taking on higher lvl MOBs that didn't spell death. You could only take one MOB on at a time but I wasn't alone...I had another 5 friends with me and we always played together from WoW's release. We lvled through killing and questing at the same time...the fact that we used to get through the quests so quickly and the MOBs were a lot tougher then us gave us lots of XP. In truth me and my friends enjoyed doing all those quests together...to me in my opinion WoW should have never had PvP included. Thats what I think personally anyway....but in reality I think WoW is the best PvE game there is, so the quest grind in that game doesn't bother me one bit and it shouldn't bother other people either. The quests that you are given lvl40+ are amazing! I dont think that MOBs should have a purpose of giving a lot of exp unless they are a lot tougher then you....otherwise its too easy and fast to lvl up.
Back to topic - What you proposed is based on reality for there not to be such a great difference in character stats between a maxed out character and a fresh character. That system would work perfectly in a game like Morrowind! But not a hack and slash game! Roma Victor are using that system...its called the Twitch combat system I think...not sure forgot. Anyway it doesn't work well for point and click or hack and slash games.
Lastly...When I said that if a player has maxed out his character...I never recommended or said he should start a totally new one or have to experiment with his skills. Don't re-word what I say please, I don't like it! Now I only mentioned it because you said that players may finally get bored of their character...now supposively in a PvP orientated game, its not quite that simple to get bored of your character....because you have a lot of competition and you always want your character to be as effective in battles as possible....so I don't see a player getting bored of his character because the character can't advance anymore....besides that there is a plan for players to gain rewards (a sort of honour system) but the rewards are not given to your character exactly but to the small faction which your character is part of (smaller factions together make up one of the 2 main factions). I dont know much about these small factions. I dont know what these rewards are....but I doubt they are character advancements.
I'm sorry Mikey but you can be hard to understand at times as you aren't always consistent with yourself. Before you said there was no grind in WoW and now you are saying that there is and you don't mind.
"That system would work perfectly in a game like Morrowind! But not a hack and slash game!" Can you please tell me what you mean by a game like Morrowind and why it wouldnt work in a hack and slash game?
"I think there should be a limit to how far a character should improve his stats....then that player may start a new character or experiment with his fully lvled character with new skills and stuff to see what he may come up with." I never recommended or said he should start a totally new one or have to experiment with his skills. Maybe Im just missing something but apparently these two statements of yours are completely conflicting.
I agree that you should not be able to gain levels faster with farming then doing quests but I think its taken to an extreme in games like Guild Wars where you can hardly level up at all without doing quests.
Also, I do think it might be a partial solution to do what TG will be doing and offer faction based rewards but I don't think it alone is enough. There is nothing discouraging people to start grinding up new chars within the same faction and still retain these bonuses. Not that Im saying people shouldnt be allowed to do that of course, but I think character attachment should be nurtured.
Originally posted by Froztwolf As to having small XP for mobs and alot for quests, GW does this to the extreme and it bothers me. I don't want to be forced to do quests to advance my char. Sometimes I just want to go out and kill something.
I agree with you on that note. Again notice that if one uses a totally skill based system of advancement (as in UO) the issue of having to "kill" goes away - in UO ONLY the swinging the sword and hitting the creature (for example) mattered - NOT the killing.
Originally posted by Froztwolf
This ties in with my opinion the the strength gap between max and min level should be reduced. Even if you are a blade master who has been practicing for 50 years and can control blades with the thought alone, you will still be seriously injured if a 16 year old kid comes up to you from the behind and stabs you through a gap in your armor. He wouldn't stand a chance in 1on1 but can really harm you using the right tactics.
Again, I couldn't agree more. Another related problem for the original poster to consider is this (something that is a problem with every game I have played so far). Every game models the "to hit" probability as apparently based (apparently because I cannot see their code) on the relative levels of the two opponents - thus a level 5 simply cannot HIT a level 50 - no matter what (this is secondary to the damage to be dealt on a hit). So (for example) in most games when a level 5 shoots his arrow at a level 50 (or swings the sword or casts the spell or whatever), he ALWAYS misses. This is rubbish - you do NOT dodge an arrow or bullet and it is precious hard up close and personal to dodge a sword swing. Again, they are modeling reality very poorly and it results in poor game play. As per what you said, if I shoot an arrow at somebody (just one example) whether that arrow hits or not has little or nothing to do with their "level". The game that models this more carefully will go far in playability and fun factor as it begins to add not only more realism but more importantly begins to allow for tactics (as you said).
It sounds like you guys are truly interested in making a game for the players, which group you are catering too seems to be a bit of debate but either way I think at the very least the game will do well from the sounds of it thus far.
However since there has been some debate about it, I am going to touch on a few of what I consider fundamental flaws in a level based system and compare it directly to a skill based system, and while I do not consider a skill based a grind unlike a level based. For the record a series of PM's where I have been discussing some of these things with someone else is what spurred this.
The primary difference in a level based and skill based system is obviously how you attain skill levels. In a level based system you gain in two manners, you gain some skill while fighting I am sure most here are familiar with seeing your skill raise. However the problem in this is that your skill is limited or capped to the amount you can get per level, thus artifically locking skill progress into level progression. Now upon glance this does not seem so bad unless you consider the following; In a level system you cannot progress your level without the defeat of an entity. This in itsself is simply wrong, you should never only derive experience from the defeat of an entity, you should get it from the battle itsself. It might be slightly different if skills in a level based system were more meaningful, however because they are artifically limited based on the level they usually are meaningless and just a number you watch raise. In the end your outcome in a battle with this system is still determined by your level and the gear you wear. Now because of this, in order to gain experience to progress levels you must defeat entities, and thus you end up with the level grind of mindlessly slaughtering thousands of npc's to push that yellow bar along. I think the best way to put this is, that even in defeat you should learn something, in a level based system if you are defeated you lose nothing, thus people are less inclined to run away from a fight as opposed to just standing there and duking it out hoping the random number generator swings in their favor.
Now in a skill based system there are numerous methods to gain skill. I am going to use the UO type system as an example here. The primary method of course remains fighting, excepting the difference here is that you do not need to defeat an entity to gain skill from it, you gain skill from the battle not from the victory. This also allows a player to expand into personal tactics outside the game limitations, of simply things such as hit and run, Kiting and other such methods. Of course there are a slew of others I am just being as brief as I can, While a level based system also allows for these tactics, again There is no benefit in the level based system unless the battle results in victory, otherwise it is all for naught. Other methods that exist in a skill system include training on objects, ie: Training dummies. Now you certaintly will not become a master beating on a dummy but it will increase your skill in the very beginning as well as increase vital stats such as strength and stamina for example. Also there is the oft forgotten method of skill increasing which is Sparring with another player. This is the one system that a level based system simply will not support, firstly no player in their right mind is going to let you kill them over and over to advance your level. Secondly you will not derive any real skill if any at all from hitting another player. This honestly makes about as much sense as drinking bleach. If you are fighting another player presumably of equal skill you should get decided increases in your skills simply for the fact that this entity is far more challenging then any AI. There are actually a ton of other facets to this in things that could be implemented, the sheer amount of things that could be done with a well made skill system as oppossed to a level grind are simply mind blowing not to mention infinitally more realistic.
Now some of the flaws with the UO type skill system. Firstly it can be perceived as a grind as most people do not consider the character effective until capped out, now while this is not entirely true it does warrant consideration at the very least. So the delimma is, how to eliminate the grind while allowing player skill to dominate combat, without making it a twitch fest and alowing tactics to play an equal role. Thus far noone has created a system as such, the UO type system is honestly the best we have currently. Its far from perfect but it is the best available, I have some idea's on a system that could bridge that gap but as I sat here and thought about it, I decided that those are best kept to myself for the time being as it would seem rather silly for me to give someone else the ability to make a ton of money off my idea. Suffice to say it is feasible with the current technology to create a system that is skill based that nearly eliminates the grind factor, while allowing player skill and tactics to dominate combat both PVE and PVP and maintain a balance.
Another flaw with level based grinding is its inherit problems with PVE balance. People are under the delusion that levels are best for PVE. Are they really? I honestly disagree and I fail to see why developers continue to implement such an archaic system. The only effect a level based system has it, it artificially limits players to a certain speed of progression through something commonly known as the leveling curve. However one of the nasty side effects of this curve that people fail to see is that It constantly forces the developer to create bigger badder area to explore and kill in, but as a result of this increasing of levels and attirbutes of npc's, they are thus forced to increase the player avatar's levels, stats and Equipment selection to keep up with the curve. This sounds fine on paper, and in theory works well however there is a nasty unmentioned sideeffect. It completely ends up negating the challenge of areas implemented early in the game, trivializing much of the content. Why is this a problem? Its very simple think of it this way, I am going to use EQ as an example. Pre Kunark the high level dungeon of choise was Lower Guk, It took an experienced group to delve deep and even then a mistake could send a party packing. However once kunark came out and expansions past it, this place suddenly became trivial. You could find single players in there happily whacking away at dozens of npcs at the same time without a single bit of fear of death. Now lets look at this realistically, If you have 30 people beating on you, I do not care how strong you are, your simply going to succumb to the sheer numbers.
The advantage to a skill based system is that even lower level areas still pose risk to those caught unawares. Now while you may be able to plow through the newbie creatues with your Godly sword of Uberness one hit killing them all, lets say you run out of stamina to keep swinging...what happens then? Well in a level system you simply chill for a few moments resting your stamina..while everything is attempting to beat on you ( do i honestly have to point out the disparity of if things are swinging and missing realistically you would be constantlly dodging and moving about taxing yourself, not sitting still ) You are now in trouble in a skill based system. You have over extended yourself and run out of stamina, the hits while light at first due to your stamina being fine are starting to land harder and harder as they press the attack because you overstepped your ability. You see in this setup even low levels can remain dangerous to well equiped max skilled characters because there is no level gap and auto dodge regardless of stamina is not implemented. What does this do for the developer? Its simple it keeps older content viable even with numerous expansions, it helps prevent easy farming of items thus limiting the influx of material into the game, it helps curb mmorpg economey inflation because it limits the items coming into game ( note I said curb not stop ), and in general instead of the developer being forced to push one expansion after the next to keep their player base interested, most of the time sacrificing quality for quantity, it allows the developer more time to focus on the quality of expansions, it gives far more freedom when creating items. This is a huge plus because a minor tweaks in items make a big impact so the stats on items do not need to ever get to rediculous levels. This also allows for far more customability for the characters because it does not force everyone to use the same equipment in order to be at the top. More player diversity, because honestly everyone having the same *unique* magic sword really destroys the unique factor. Unique is flagrently abused in mmorpgs today, items flagged as unique are not and are probabaly carried by a thousand other players.
This is getting long so I am going to stop at this point. I think the point is adequitely conveyed.
Originally posted by Dekoth However since there has been some debate about it, I am going to touch on a few of what I consider fundamental flaws in a level based system and compare it directly to a skill based system, and while I do not consider a skill based a grind unlike a level based. For the record a series of PM's where I have been discussing some of these things with someone else is what spurred this. ... (much more deleted just to save room )
What he said! Again, look back to my posts (and somebody else on here) - this is what we are saying (just using different words).
In core: Level is bad, skill is good. Much more has been and can be (and needs to be) said, but this pretty much sums it up.
In the same vein: Class system is bad, non-class system is good - for all the same reasons and more. There is NOTHING inherent in being a "fighter class" (for example) that makes one stronger or faster or less intelligent or less wise, etc. Give the player the options and ability to make whatever combination of stats and skills he wishes and you will have a wonderful game (at the core).
Yeah....Dekoth is right...I forgot that skill can be gained even my not succesfully eliminating an entity and also Sparring or whatever Dekoth called it is a quick and easy way to increase your skills.
I was just trying to stick to the topic before but I guess you are right in the end....Exp and lvling just sucks.....I can't see any possibilities for it anymore.
But what bothers me is why Game developers making games focused at PvP are not including a pure skill based system...there has to be a logical explanation behind why they tend to avoid it.
I played Irth Online and to be honest I loved it.....pure skill based system...you learn skills buy studying books you buy from trainers and gain attributes by successfully gaining 10 skill points per skill. Lets say you have fencing....its at 0.0/10.0 and you using a weapon that belongs to the fencing skill...you get it to 10.0/10.0 and then you can go and then you look at your stats screen and you see free available attrinute stat points...so you go back to this guy who sells stat increase books...lets say I want strength I will buy a book for stregth...study it...gain a skill point for strength and then buy another book of strength...study it and gain another skill point for strength. As you can see from my explanation you can't hold more then one book in your inventory for the same type of stat....you can have a book of agility and a book of strength but not 2 books or more of the same stat. Anyway its very confusing to explain....I don't feel like going into much detail....but I like it more then UO's system I think....I don't know about you guys.....but its also very similar to UOs just not the same.
This is addressed to Seeker728 - Wow....sorry mate no offense...it could be me, but I had the hardest time understanding what you had to do say! I just spent 30 minutes going over and over what you had to say as slowly as possible...you put in way too many technicle terms
No problem Mikey, sometimes I babble, that's the problem with forums, you don't have bodylanguage to go by to guage whether or not you're losing a listener
Also I felt that character customisation is possibly limited by your system more then lets say the system I proposed to them.....my proposed system had the possibility of a Warrior being a total duel wielding master swordsman, but he was weak as hell...
Actually, the system I was trying to propose allows for exactly that sort of development. Let me try to explain it a bit better.
Lets say that under the header of Swordsmanship as a skill, there are 5 basic entry skills. They are:
Sword and Shield, 2 Handed, Fencing, Two Weapon, and Florentine.
Sword and Sheild fighters would tend to be very good at weathering a sustained fight as they could hide behind their sheild and use less stamina as they looked for their opening of choice. THey're also very good at defense for party members. Their main limitation is how durable their sheild is (meaning that it too has a HP meter, as should all equipment, but that's a totally different topic). This sort of fighter would be served by steadily progressing all his physical stats, as they each serve his focus to one degree or another, his choices being his personal preferance. This type of fighter would have a set of skills that make use of his two pieces of equipment tha would allow him to do things like block arrows, intercept attacks for another person, better at deflecting blows so that his shield lasts longer, shield rush, opting for pure defense by retreating and yet blocking attacks, as well as some sword maneuvers such as a hack that does more damage than a thrust, slower but more lethal, and so forth.
2 Handed fighters focus on big, heavy weapons that are better at inflicting serious damage. The Fighter himself doesn't have to be slow, but Strength and Endurance are pretty important to him. Now he might opt to be a heavy armor wielder to provide for defense, thus being like a tank, or he might opt to be very fast, the differance being one form of fighting is more skill/stat intensive as he'll have to advance his agility on par with his strength, and develop the skill for evading harm. This sort of Fighter goes for the 1-2 shot kills since he favors a big heavy hitting weapon. Skills in this set would include learning how to parry a weapon effectively, sweeps designed to injure more than one foe, making use of his reach to land a attack first, faster but less damaging attacks or slower and thus more powerful attacks depending on the situation.
Fencing This sort of fighter favors a single weapon ranging in size depending on his strength, ranging from a Dagger to a Longsword (and yes including a rapier within that range). Fencers focus on speed and accuracy more than on raw strength, but the stronger the Fencer, the heavier the weapon he can use which will affect his lethality. Admittedly, a Fencer using a longsword would be very rare, he'd have to have near Conan levels of strength, but it would be possible. Fencers have classic maneuvers available to them, such as the Fleche, thrust, parry, slash, ect. Its emphasis is on speed and accuracy, with one's defense coming from a mix of agility and active defense (i.e. parrying).
Two Weapon Fighting- THis sort of fighter favors two weapons of preferably equal balance, like say a pair of hand axes, or pair of short swords, maces, ect. The strength of this style is that either weapon can be used for attack or defense and allows a fighter to press or retreat depending on the situation with greater flexibility. Such a fighter learns how to be ambidexterous, so that he can equally attack or defend with either hand, from either flank. His skill tree would at first develop his off hand so that he would be almost as skilled with it as his primary hand, both defensively and offensively, then he could develop other skills such as a cascade of attacks where it seems like he's just a windmill of death, able to engage a greater number of foes and retain his full defensive value, and so forth. Such a fighter has again the option of how much he wants to advance his strength to govern just how big of a pair of weapons he uses, but agility is very important to these guys as is stamina (takes a lot of energy to swing two weapons, and the multiple opponent strength of this style also demands a lot of staying power).
Flourtine also uses two weapons, but it's a blending of Fencing and Two Weapon, with the second weapon being a lighter and faster weapon that is designed primarily to act as a shield against another blade. This sort of fighter has some fencing maneuvers, but also develops his off hand more than a Fencer does, with some skills from both disciplines being part of his advancement. This sort of fighter also favors agility, but if he wants to play a particularly strong type and be the swort who uses a long sword and hand axe instead of a rapier and main gauche, if he's willing to invest the effort, he could eventually take it there.
Just a quick note, in the movie Gladiator, where Russel Crowe's character chops off the head with a double shortsword stroke is basically what's a coup'de'grace, a death blow, any style could have such a maneuver, but it pretty much requires a opponent to be mostly defeated already. Crowe could've just as well just thrust his sword through his opponent's heart, but it's not as visually impressive.
In short, any one of these sorts of fighters could be speed oriented, by having less strength, and more agility, they can develop certain skills at the sacrifice of others. Less strength means you don't have the option of wearing the heavier armor, lots of strength means you can wear a lot more and not get nearly as winded as someone whos only barely able to wear it and so on. If the skill tree is set up to where your defense is in part, your skill with a weapon and an investment in said skill (ilke say parry for example), and the weapon in question favors a given stat (like say rapier favors agility over strength), and an additional defensive skill is available to develop (like say Dodge), then you can create exactly that sort of character. He will have a moderate strength, high agility and advanced stamina, with his skills in his blade being well developed to include parrying to augment his Dodge which he also built up as part of his defense. A tank doesn't bother with dodge, he lets his armor and possibly shield deal with the hurt, and so on.
Hope that explains things a bit better.
RE: Grinding
Possibly, but from my expierence of having played UO where a character's stats would go up related to what activities they pursued, and likewise their skills went up with use, you can do a lot to reduce the grind part of it by making the range of the skill's numbers tighter. An example of a frustrating grind. All skills range from 1-1000 with blocks of 200 being needed to get a new skill ability. All mobs if you defeat them give you +1 to your skill (or whatever other skill in question, a success gives you +1), you have a grind.
It gets made worse if you include a "Con" system, where the mob has to be of a certain value to you in order to give you that plus. Such as, you can beat up goblins from 1-200 and get pluses, the first 50 goblins give you a +1 per goblin, the next 50 give you a +1 per 2, the next 50 gives you a +1 per 4 goblins, and the final 50 pts that goblins can advance your skill by is at a rate of +1 per 8 goblins killed. Now you have to move on to orcs for 201-400, ect. That my friend, is definitely a grind.
But if the skill set goes from say 1-100, with each +1 to the skill being gotten from defeating a single 'even con' opponent, the grind is greatly reduced. Lets say though that you got a player who wants to play it safe and doesn't want to fight a challenging opponent, he'd prefer to beat up slightly easier opponents. Using the Goblin/Orc/Etc example from above. Lets say he fought Goblins till his sword skill was 25, they were challenging up to that point, but now they're not so challening. Instead of getting a +1 for every goblin, he gets a +1 for every 2 for the next 20 levels to his sword skill. Diminishing returns, yes it is, but he's still advancing at a significant rate. Now he has his sword skill at 45, he could move on to ocs, which have their 1 for 1 ratio of advancement to 65, but he can go through them more effectively because he opted to advance his skill on those goblins for a while longer. THis allows for two things, solo play with a slightly slower advancement, but a steady and noticeable progression once he steps up his challenge. The Orcs will give him a +1 from 66-90 for every 2 orcs that he slays.. THose orcs help im advance his sword skill all the way to 90 before he should move on, and to get there, he had to kill (from level 1) a sum total of 65 Goblins and & 70 orcs. Is that a grind? In the strictest sense of the word yes it is, but currently, the MMOG industry uses the first model above, UO used more or less this model, personally, this is the sort of grind I could handle.
But wait, doesn't that mean a character tops out too fast and nothing challenges him? No, it means he's advanced his sword skill to that level is all, and that was all one on one. Things get tricker when more opponents are involved, or if they use magic, or if there are traps, or if reinforcements show up. Also, if the game system allows for the attainment of 100 allowing for certain "extras" that one has to pick and choose from to further customize oneself, advancement is still a element.
Anyway, this has gotten much longer than I had intended it be, so I'll wrap up here and hope I explained things better
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Design your world as IF it were a real one - populate it as if it were a REAL one. Then players can adventure and play in it in any manner they wish. The way ALL zoned game worlds are today forces players to play the game in a very linear manner JUST as the developer laid it out - no freedom.
Amen brother, and if anything would make me go into a rant about MMOGs and their forumlas, it is exactly this model which EQ has been shoving down everyone's throat because of how successful "the king" was. EQ literally forced people to not only play roles defined by their class and any deviation from that role labeling one as a "bad" player, but it insisted that you could only expierence the content when you had both group composition properly formed up and organization skills to manage more than one group. Seriously, how people thought this was fun is beyond me, they got caught up in the very essence of that leveling curve you mentioned in your post.
For a virtual world to be immersive, you cannot forumlate it like that. You make it all available without that hand holding of levels and charted zones. Like you Joey, I keep looking back at UO, there is a very good reason why it was able to maintain a subscriber base from day one till current day. The graphics are antiquated and yet, people still return to that game after jumping on the ride of other current games, and that's because IMHO the game play content was superior due to not relying on the level progression system. To be sure, UO had its flaws, but if you wanted to go PvP you could do so fairly quickly, taking your lumps and moving on. Not like in DAoC where level disparity made such a huge differance that you didn't even bother till you were level 50. Thus you grind-grind-grind to begin play at level 50???
I personally think that any game company who wants to develop something new should require it's programmers to play a char in UO, EQ, and DAoC from level 1 to whatever the cap is, to properly appreciate what the player base has evolved through. UO would show that freedom of virtual interest and a limited grind was its claim to success, while unmoderated PvP was it's flaw. EQ is all about the level curb consuming one till it became more work than one's work, its only claim to success is how social it was, other than that I am admittedly biased against it as I found myself hating that game. DAoC showed that faction play offers a lot of replayability, that skills trees within a class offered different play styles and could work as its claim to fame. Its downfall was that you had to grind till you cold have fun, and that populations if not managed could cause severe team imbalances. Oh, and lest I forget, when they tried to become more like EQ with their Trials of Atlantis expansion, they really took it in the shorts. Bah, I'm babbling again, time to end this post. Cheers.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Let me start off by saying Im a huge Star Trek fan. Ive played every single game ever made with a Trek label (and most were pretty bad lol). Ive gone to 6 conventions. I have a picture of me and William Shatner on my Office desk.
Anyway, with regards to the Trek mmorpg...I gotta say Im pretty disappointed that you are going to a level based system bleh. Level based games are typically dumbed down games targeted towards the teenie bopper crowd. Your target audience however (assuming its me and other trekkies) would prefer a much more sophisticated skill based game. Yes, your level system looks complex but under all those chooses lies one thing...a damage multiplier.
In a level based game gear and equipment matter very little. Thanks to a damage multiplier, I will always win against an inferior foe and always lose to a superior one (within reason). Gear and loot will never change that. Why is this important you ask ? Simple, long term appeal. Once Ive beaten the game so to speak I have little else to do in a level based game.
Case in point WoW, everyone hits the level cap of 60 and quits the game. With skill based games like Star Wars Galaxies (before they blew it with that dumbed down combat revamp) gear matters a lot. There is no damage multipler determining the outcome of a fight. I can (or could) lose to a mob, go get some loot and have it made into a better weapon, go back and defeat that same mob. In other words, I always have room to improve my character. In a level based game, thats just not true. That mob will always beat me.
Also, in a skill based game I typically can change my professions. In games like EQ, WoW, EQ2, COH, etc Im stuck once I pick my profession. What if I want to change from an engineer to security or the cpt chair ? Seems like your system like any other level one wont let me do that.
Overall, I will never ever like nor play a level based game. Theyre just too simplistic and hold no long term appeal to many. I love star trek, but Im not gonna play an EQ clone in space just because it looks like Trek. And honestly Im a bit surprised you guys are going that route. Unless you're targeting the kiddie market from WoW, I cant see the game being a huge hit.
Also, you mentioned in another post zones and making them progressively harder. I do not like that idea at all. Zones like this didnt work nor appeal in EQ2, why here ? I prefer a system similiar to WoW and old SWG where mobs got progressively harder the further away from civilization you got. And also you could find many different difficulty types in an area. Your idea causes one thing to happen, level past that area and never return again. Why would I ever go back to zone "b" if I cant get xp and everything is too low for me ? Referring to end game again, once I hit your lvl cap why would I continue to play ? Why would I ever go back to an easy zone. In SWG, I always have reasons to be on a "starter" planet like tatooine cause there are krayts (mobs way beyond a newb's ability)
Good luck and let me know if you change your mind. To me though, all Im seeing from your ideas are the same old things that come from EQ bleh. Star Trek should be an innovative game that breaks the mold like the tv shows did
Seeker: I like the point you make about making progression come in smaller increments. One often says "Ok, Im gonna kill these beasts until I hit the next level/skillpoint/whatever. If you kept hitting them, then there would be less time spend on grinding and hating every minute of it. Of course it wouldn't fix the problem in and of itself but it would go a long way.
Admriker: you should be playing EVE my friend. Spaceship based MMO targeted to adults
Originally posted by Froztwolf Admriker: you should be playing EVE my friend. Spaceship based MMO targeted to adults
I have played EVE on and off for a while now. Its a great game for the adult gamer. However Ive always wished I could climb out of my ship and toss back a few beers in a space station cantina. And then head down to the surface for some rest and relaxation. With Trek Im hoping to experience that.
But like I posted before, not too keen on a game with a level based cap on it. Those kind of games, even if fun like WoW, get old after a while. Im hoping for something I can play for a loooong time.
Star Trek online has the potential to be the greatest thing man has ever made (Excluding sliced bread of course) but unfortunately it also has potential to flop catastrophically. I just hope Gods and Heroes goes nicely so they will at least have the funding to do Star Trek online properly
Sorry for not replying sooner but we have been really busy over the last few days. We have changed the system somewhat, some people were wondering why we had 2 ways to gain attributes and we agree after some thought this system was flawed so we evolved it. We now are going to have 2 different sets of attributes one set isnt attributes at all but for no we call them attributes. The first set is the same as most games Strength/con/int/dex..Etc these will be gained by using weapons or certain skills. For example if you use an axe you will gain 2 stre and 1 dex per increase (This needs balancing still)
The second set will be attributes like Stealth/Toughness etc we plan on having maybe 20 different attributes here. These are the attributes you spend your points on every level up.
I hope this is explained well.
If we implement this system we are looking at having maybe 500-1000 skills. With this many skills some will no doubt end up being the same but just used with a different weapon but the majority will be very different.
We will implement some way to reduce skill points once we have worked out the cap.
Also when I said zones I didnt mean zones like EQ2 I meant the zones more like WOW. There still different zones but no zoning involved. I dont believe there should be any loading time involved with MMORPG unless its totally necessary.
I think this has answered most questions that have been asked. Everyones posts have helped us a lot. This system is still under development and all your posts help us develop it further.
Scaramoosh: Thank you for your well thought out and constructive reply.
Gary Director of T.G Enterprises
T.G Enterprises. Bringing you the next Great MMORPG.
Originally posted by T.GEnt Sorry for not replying sooner but we have been really busy over the last few days. We have changed the system somewhat, some people were wondering why we had 2 ways to gain attributes and we agree after some thought this system was flawed so we evolved it. We now are going to have 2 different sets of attributes one set isnt attributes at all but for no we call them attributes. The first set is the same as most games Strength/con/int/dex..Etc these will be gained by using weapons or certain skills. For example if you use an axe you will gain 2 stre and 1 dex per increase (This needs balancing still) The second set will be attributes like Stealth/Toughness etc we plan on having maybe 20 different attributes here. These are the attributes you spend your points on every level up. I hope this is explained well. If we implement this system we are looking at having maybe 500-1000 skills. With this many skills some will no doubt end up being the same but just used with a different weapon but the majority will be very different. We will implement some way to reduce skill points once we have worked out the cap. Also when I said zones I didnt mean zones like EQ2 I meant the zones more like WOW. There still different zones but no zoning involved. I dont believe there should be any loading time involved with MMORPG unless its totally necessary. I think this has answered most questions that have been asked. Everyones posts have helped us a lot. This system is still under development and all your posts help us develop it further. Scaramoosh: Thank you for your well thought out and constructive reply.
Gary Director of T.G Enterprises
Well at this point, I am a little more fully onboard. The simple fact that the company is willing to look at their system and be flexible enough within a reasonable amount to make changes while remaining as true to their vision is encouraging. Of course I will temper that with, a large percentage are willing early on. So at this point I am very interested to see what T.G comes up with, Perhaps they will suprise us and create an unthought of hybrid that takes the best of both systems and pulls them together. I will say it like this, it was really the ability to untrain skills that finally caught the majority of my attention. I must admit, there is nothing more fustrating in a game then to have a skill cap, to spend time and energy maxing that skill only to find it utterly useless, or to find it made ineffective without certain complementary skills later in the game and no way to reverse your decision. I personally am of the type I do not like to maintain multiple characters. While I have done it out of necessity I would far rather focus on one character and simply mold their skillset overtime as they evolve and as my taste's change. This I think would honestly hold far more longivity to players on the average then forcing them to reroll new characters. Do not get me wrong I think there are players that enjoy creating multiple characters, but I can think of far more who would rather keep their existing character and simple reshape the mold per se.
Now from a level based perspective, FFXI came the closest to them in my opinion with their subjob system and the ability to change jobs at any time and level them independently. Of course the downside to this was you had to pay additional money for more characters if you wanted them, which was honestly a poor decision at best. But even with that said, I would far rather have skill based.
No zones is a good thing. That alone will make me give the game a shot. I still dont like a level system but I might tolerate it with so many different options to create real differences between players.
And the fact that you're looking for opinions and ideas is fantastic. So many other mmorpg devs like SOE never bother to listen.
Question...what kind of economy do you anticipate there to be ? Is there a loot system ? I recall reading that engineers will act like crafters sorta making weapons and such. Will there be loot to use to enhance crafted items ? Will there be vendors, bazarr, or some sorta auction house system to sell items ?
Comments
Sorry Frozt but I think you incredibly misunderstood a lot of what I said or took what I said to the extreme. Now I agree that WoW encouraged quest grinding at the begining of a character's life but there were other possible ways to gain xp like taking on higher lvl MOBs that didn't spell death. You could only take one MOB on at a time but I wasn't alone...I had another 5 friends with me and we always played together from WoW's release. We lvled through killing and questing at the same time...the fact that we used to get through the quests so quickly and the MOBs were a lot tougher then us gave us lots of XP. In truth me and my friends enjoyed doing all those quests together...to me in my opinion WoW should have never had PvP included. Thats what I think personally anyway....but in reality I think WoW is the best PvE game there is, so the quest grind in that game doesn't bother me one bit and it shouldn't bother other people either. The quests that you are given lvl40+ are amazing!
I dont think that MOBs should have a purpose of giving a lot of exp unless they are a lot tougher then you....otherwise its too easy and fast to lvl up.
Back to topic - What you proposed is based on reality for there not to be such a great difference in character stats between a maxed out character and a fresh character.
That system would work perfectly in a game like Morrowind! But not a hack and slash game! Roma Victor are using that system...its called the Twitch combat system I think...not sure forgot.
Anyway it doesn't work well for point and click or hack and slash games.
Lastly...When I said that if a player has maxed out his character...I never recommended or said he should start a totally new one or have to experiment with his skills.
Don't re-word what I say please, I don't like it!
Now I only mentioned it because you said that players may finally get bored of their character...now supposively in a PvP orientated game, its not quite that simple to get bored of your character....because you have a lot of competition and you always want your character to be as effective in battles as possible....so I don't see a player getting bored of his character
because the character can't advance anymore....besides that there is a plan for players to gain rewards (a sort of honour system) but the rewards are not given to your character exactly but to the small faction which your character is part of (smaller factions together make up one of the 2 main factions). I dont know much about these small factions.
I dont know what these rewards are....but I doubt they are character advancements.
I'm sorry Mikey but you can be hard to understand at times as you aren't always consistent with yourself. Before you said there was no grind in WoW and now you are saying that there is and you don't mind.
"That system would work perfectly in a game like Morrowind! But not a hack and slash game!"
Can you please tell me what you mean by a game like Morrowind and why it wouldnt work in a hack and slash game?
"I think there should be a limit to how far a character should improve his stats....then that player may start a new character or experiment with his fully lvled character with new skills and stuff to see what he may come up with."
I never recommended or said he should start a totally new one or have to experiment with his skills.
Maybe Im just missing something but apparently these two statements of yours are completely conflicting.
I agree that you should not be able to gain levels faster with farming then doing quests but I think its taken to an extreme in games like Guild Wars where you can hardly level up at all without doing quests.
Also, I do think it might be a partial solution to do what TG will be doing and offer faction based rewards but I don't think it alone is enough. There is nothing discouraging people to start grinding up new chars within the same faction and still retain these bonuses. Not that Im saying people shouldnt be allowed to do that of course, but I think character attachment should be nurtured.
If all else in life fails you, buy a vowel.
It sounds like you guys are truly interested in making a game for the players, which group you are catering too seems to be a bit of debate but either way I think at the very least the game will do well from the sounds of it thus far.
However since there has been some debate about it, I am going to touch on a few of what I consider fundamental flaws in a level based system and compare it directly to a skill based system, and while I do not consider a skill based a grind unlike a level based. For the record a series of PM's where I have been discussing some of these things with someone else is what spurred this.
The primary difference in a level based and skill based system is obviously how you attain skill levels. In a level based system you gain in two manners, you gain some skill while fighting I am sure most here are familiar with seeing your skill raise. However the problem in this is that your skill is limited or capped to the amount you can get per level, thus artifically locking skill progress into level progression. Now upon glance this does not seem so bad unless you consider the following; In a level system you cannot progress your level without the defeat of an entity. This in itsself is simply wrong, you should never only derive experience from the defeat of an entity, you should get it from the battle itsself. It might be slightly different if skills in a level based system were more meaningful, however because they are artifically limited based on the level they usually are meaningless and just a number you watch raise. In the end your outcome in a battle with this system is still determined by your level and the gear you wear. Now because of this, in order to gain experience to progress levels you must defeat entities, and thus you end up with the level grind of mindlessly slaughtering thousands of npc's to push that yellow bar along. I think the best way to put this is, that even in defeat you should learn something, in a level based system if you are defeated you lose nothing, thus people are less inclined to run away from a fight as opposed to just standing there and duking it out hoping the random number generator swings in their favor.
Now in a skill based system there are numerous methods to gain skill. I am going to use the UO type system as an example here. The primary method of course remains fighting, excepting the difference here is that you do not need to defeat an entity to gain skill from it, you gain skill from the battle not from the victory. This also allows a player to expand into personal tactics outside the game limitations, of simply things such as hit and run, Kiting and other such methods. Of course there are a slew of others I am just being as brief as I can, While a level based system also allows for these tactics, again There is no benefit in the level based system unless the battle results in victory, otherwise it is all for naught. Other methods that exist in a skill system include training on objects, ie: Training dummies. Now you certaintly will not become a master beating on a dummy but it will increase your skill in the very beginning as well as increase vital stats such as strength and stamina for example. Also there is the oft forgotten method of skill increasing which is Sparring with another player. This is the one system that a level based system simply will not support, firstly no player in their right mind is going to let you kill them over and over to advance your level. Secondly you will not derive any real skill if any at all from hitting another player. This honestly makes about as much sense as drinking bleach. If you are fighting another player presumably of equal skill you should get decided increases in your skills simply for the fact that this entity is far more challenging then any AI. There are actually a ton of other facets to this in things that could be implemented, the sheer amount of things that could be done with a well made skill system as oppossed to a level grind are simply mind blowing not to mention infinitally more realistic.
Now some of the flaws with the UO type skill system. Firstly it can be perceived as a grind as most people do not consider the character effective until capped out, now while this is not entirely true it does warrant consideration at the very least. So the delimma is, how to eliminate the grind while allowing player skill to dominate combat, without making it a twitch fest and alowing tactics to play an equal role. Thus far noone has created a system as such, the UO type system is honestly the best we have currently. Its far from perfect but it is the best available, I have some idea's on a system that could bridge that gap but as I sat here and thought about it, I decided that those are best kept to myself for the time being as it would seem rather silly for me to give someone else the ability to make a ton of money off my idea. Suffice to say it is feasible with the current technology to create a system that is skill based that nearly eliminates the grind factor, while allowing player skill and tactics to dominate combat both PVE and PVP and maintain a balance.
Another flaw with level based grinding is its inherit problems with PVE balance. People are under the delusion that levels are best for PVE. Are they really? I honestly disagree and I fail to see why developers continue to implement such an archaic system. The only effect a level based system has it, it artificially limits players to a certain speed of progression through something commonly known as the leveling curve. However one of the nasty side effects of this curve that people fail to see is that It constantly forces the developer to create bigger badder area to explore and kill in, but as a result of this increasing of levels and attirbutes of npc's, they are thus forced to increase the player avatar's levels, stats and Equipment selection to keep up with the curve. This sounds fine on paper, and in theory works well however there is a nasty unmentioned sideeffect. It completely ends up negating the challenge of areas implemented early in the game, trivializing much of the content. Why is this a problem? Its very simple think of it this way, I am going to use EQ as an example. Pre Kunark the high level dungeon of choise was Lower Guk, It took an experienced group to delve deep and even then a mistake could send a party packing. However once kunark came out and expansions past it, this place suddenly became trivial. You could find single players in there happily whacking away at dozens of npcs at the same time without a single bit of fear of death. Now lets look at this realistically, If you have 30 people beating on you, I do not care how strong you are, your simply going to succumb to the sheer numbers.
The advantage to a skill based system is that even lower level areas still pose risk to those caught unawares. Now while you may be able to plow through the newbie creatues with your Godly sword of Uberness one hit killing them all, lets say you run out of stamina to keep swinging...what happens then? Well in a level system you simply chill for a few moments resting your stamina..while everything is attempting to beat on you ( do i honestly have to point out the disparity of if things are swinging and missing realistically you would be constantlly dodging and moving about taxing yourself, not sitting still ) You are now in trouble in a skill based system. You have over extended yourself and run out of stamina, the hits while light at first due to your stamina being fine are starting to land harder and harder as they press the attack because you overstepped your ability. You see in this setup even low levels can remain dangerous to well equiped max skilled characters because there is no level gap and auto dodge regardless of stamina is not implemented. What does this do for the developer? Its simple it keeps older content viable even with numerous expansions, it helps prevent easy farming of items thus limiting the influx of material into the game, it helps curb mmorpg economey inflation because it limits the items coming into game ( note I said curb not stop ), and in general instead of the developer being forced to push one expansion after the next to keep their player base interested, most of the time sacrificing quality for quantity, it allows the developer more time to focus on the quality of expansions, it gives far more freedom when creating items. This is a huge plus because a minor tweaks in items make a big impact so the stats on items do not need to ever get to rediculous levels. This also allows for far more customability for the characters because it does not force everyone to use the same equipment in order to be at the top. More player diversity, because honestly everyone having the same *unique* magic sword really destroys the unique factor. Unique is flagrently abused in mmorpgs today, items flagged as unique are not and are probabaly carried by a thousand other players.
This is getting long so I am going to stop at this point. I think the point is adequitely conveyed.
What he said! Again, look back to my posts (and somebody else on here) - this is what we are saying (just using different words).
In core: Level is bad, skill is good. Much more has been and can be (and needs to be) said, but this pretty much sums it up.
In the same vein: Class system is bad, non-class system is good - for all the same reasons and more. There is NOTHING inherent in being a "fighter class" (for example) that makes one stronger or faster or less intelligent or less wise, etc. Give the player the options and ability to make whatever combination of stats and skills he wishes and you will have a wonderful game (at the core).
If all else in life fails you, buy a vowel.
Yeah....Dekoth is right...I forgot that skill can be gained even my not succesfully eliminating an entity and also Sparring or whatever Dekoth called it is a quick and easy way to increase your skills.
I was just trying to stick to the topic before but I guess you are right in the end....Exp and lvling just sucks.....I can't see any possibilities for it anymore.
But what bothers me is why Game developers making games focused at PvP are not including a pure skill based system...there has to be a logical explanation behind why they tend to avoid it.
I played Irth Online and to be honest I loved it.....pure skill based system...you learn skills buy studying books you buy from trainers and gain attributes by successfully gaining 10 skill points per skill. Lets say you have fencing....its at 0.0/10.0 and you using a weapon that belongs to the fencing skill...you get it to 10.0/10.0 and then you can go and then you look at your stats screen and you see free available attrinute stat points...so you go back to this guy who sells stat increase books...lets say I want strength I will buy a book for stregth...study it...gain a skill point for strength and then buy another book of strength...study it and gain another skill point for strength. As you can see from my explanation you can't hold more then one book in your inventory for the same type of stat....you can have a book of agility and a book of strength but not 2 books or more of the same stat. Anyway its very confusing to explain....I don't feel like going into much detail....but I like it more then UO's system I think....I don't know about you guys.....but its also very similar to UOs just not the same.
This is addressed to Seeker728 - Wow....sorry mate no offense...it could be me, but I had the hardest time understanding what you had to do say! I just spent 30 minutes going over and over what you had to say as slowly as possible...you put in way too many technicle terms
No problem Mikey, sometimes I babble, that's the problem with forums, you don't have bodylanguage to go by to guage whether or not you're losing a listener
Also I felt that character customisation is possibly limited by your system more then lets say the system I proposed to them.....my proposed system had the possibility of a Warrior being a total duel wielding master swordsman, but he was weak as hell...
Actually, the system I was trying to propose allows for exactly that sort of development. Let me try to explain it a bit better.
Lets say that under the header of Swordsmanship as a skill, there are 5 basic entry skills. They are:
Sword and Shield, 2 Handed, Fencing, Two Weapon, and Florentine.
Sword and Sheild fighters would tend to be very good at weathering a sustained fight as they could hide behind their sheild and use less stamina as they looked for their opening of choice. THey're also very good at defense for party members. Their main limitation is how durable their sheild is (meaning that it too has a HP meter, as should all equipment, but that's a totally different topic). This sort of fighter would be served by steadily progressing all his physical stats, as they each serve his focus to one degree or another, his choices being his personal preferance. This type of fighter would have a set of skills that make use of his two pieces of equipment tha would allow him to do things like block arrows, intercept attacks for another person, better at deflecting blows so that his shield lasts longer, shield rush, opting for pure defense by retreating and yet blocking attacks, as well as some sword maneuvers such as a hack that does more damage than a thrust, slower but more lethal, and so forth.
2 Handed fighters focus on big, heavy weapons that are better at inflicting serious damage. The Fighter himself doesn't have to be slow, but Strength and Endurance are pretty important to him. Now he might opt to be a heavy armor wielder to provide for defense, thus being like a tank, or he might opt to be very fast, the differance being one form of fighting is more skill/stat intensive as he'll have to advance his agility on par with his strength, and develop the skill for evading harm. This sort of Fighter goes for the 1-2 shot kills since he favors a big heavy hitting weapon. Skills in this set would include learning how to parry a weapon effectively, sweeps designed to injure more than one foe, making use of his reach to land a attack first, faster but less damaging attacks or slower and thus more powerful attacks depending on the situation.
Fencing This sort of fighter favors a single weapon ranging in size depending on his strength, ranging from a Dagger to a Longsword (and yes including a rapier within that range). Fencers focus on speed and accuracy more than on raw strength, but the stronger the Fencer, the heavier the weapon he can use which will affect his lethality. Admittedly, a Fencer using a longsword would be very rare, he'd have to have near Conan levels of strength, but it would be possible. Fencers have classic maneuvers available to them, such as the Fleche, thrust, parry, slash, ect. Its emphasis is on speed and accuracy, with one's defense coming from a mix of agility and active defense (i.e. parrying).
Two Weapon Fighting- THis sort of fighter favors two weapons of preferably equal balance, like say a pair of hand axes, or pair of short swords, maces, ect. The strength of this style is that either weapon can be used for attack or defense and allows a fighter to press or retreat depending on the situation with greater flexibility. Such a fighter learns how to be ambidexterous, so that he can equally attack or defend with either hand, from either flank. His skill tree would at first develop his off hand so that he would be almost as skilled with it as his primary hand, both defensively and offensively, then he could develop other skills such as a cascade of attacks where it seems like he's just a windmill of death, able to engage a greater number of foes and retain his full defensive value, and so forth. Such a fighter has again the option of how much he wants to advance his strength to govern just how big of a pair of weapons he uses, but agility is very important to these guys as is stamina (takes a lot of energy to swing two weapons, and the multiple opponent strength of this style also demands a lot of staying power).
Flourtine also uses two weapons, but it's a blending of Fencing and Two Weapon, with the second weapon being a lighter and faster weapon that is designed primarily to act as a shield against another blade. This sort of fighter has some fencing maneuvers, but also develops his off hand more than a Fencer does, with some skills from both disciplines being part of his advancement. This sort of fighter also favors agility, but if he wants to play a particularly strong type and be the swort who uses a long sword and hand axe instead of a rapier and main gauche, if he's willing to invest the effort, he could eventually take it there.
Just a quick note, in the movie Gladiator, where Russel Crowe's character chops off the head with a double shortsword stroke is basically what's a coup'de'grace, a death blow, any style could have such a maneuver, but it pretty much requires a opponent to be mostly defeated already. Crowe could've just as well just thrust his sword through his opponent's heart, but it's not as visually impressive.
In short, any one of these sorts of fighters could be speed oriented, by having less strength, and more agility, they can develop certain skills at the sacrifice of others. Less strength means you don't have the option of wearing the heavier armor, lots of strength means you can wear a lot more and not get nearly as winded as someone whos only barely able to wear it and so on. If the skill tree is set up to where your defense is in part, your skill with a weapon and an investment in said skill (ilke say parry for example), and the weapon in question favors a given stat (like say rapier favors agility over strength), and an additional defensive skill is available to develop (like say Dodge), then you can create exactly that sort of character. He will have a moderate strength, high agility and advanced stamina, with his skills in his blade being well developed to include parrying to augment his Dodge which he also built up as part of his defense. A tank doesn't bother with dodge, he lets his armor and possibly shield deal with the hurt, and so on.
Hope that explains things a bit better.
RE: Grinding
Possibly, but from my expierence of having played UO where a character's stats would go up related to what activities they pursued, and likewise their skills went up with use, you can do a lot to reduce the grind part of it by making the range of the skill's numbers tighter. An example of a frustrating grind. All skills range from 1-1000 with blocks of 200 being needed to get a new skill ability. All mobs if you defeat them give you +1 to your skill (or whatever other skill in question, a success gives you +1), you have a grind.
It gets made worse if you include a "Con" system, where the mob has to be of a certain value to you in order to give you that plus. Such as, you can beat up goblins from 1-200 and get pluses, the first 50 goblins give you a +1 per goblin, the next 50 give you a +1 per 2, the next 50 gives you a +1 per 4 goblins, and the final 50 pts that goblins can advance your skill by is at a rate of +1 per 8 goblins killed. Now you have to move on to orcs for 201-400, ect. That my friend, is definitely a grind.
But if the skill set goes from say 1-100, with each +1 to the skill being gotten from defeating a single 'even con' opponent, the grind is greatly reduced. Lets say though that you got a player who wants to play it safe and doesn't want to fight a challenging opponent, he'd prefer to beat up slightly easier opponents. Using the Goblin/Orc/Etc example from above. Lets say he fought Goblins till his sword skill was 25, they were challenging up to that point, but now they're not so challening. Instead of getting a +1 for every goblin, he gets a +1 for every 2 for the next 20 levels to his sword skill. Diminishing returns, yes it is, but he's still advancing at a significant rate. Now he has his sword skill at 45, he could move on to ocs, which have their 1 for 1 ratio of advancement to 65, but he can go through them more effectively because he opted to advance his skill on those goblins for a while longer. THis allows for two things, solo play with a slightly slower advancement, but a steady and noticeable progression once he steps up his challenge. The Orcs will give him a +1 from 66-90 for every 2 orcs that he slays.. THose orcs help im advance his sword skill all the way to 90 before he should move on, and to get there, he had to kill (from level 1) a sum total of 65 Goblins and & 70 orcs. Is that a grind? In the strictest sense of the word yes it is, but currently, the MMOG industry uses the first model above, UO used more or less this model, personally, this is the sort of grind I could handle.
But wait, doesn't that mean a character tops out too fast and nothing challenges him? No, it means he's advanced his sword skill to that level is all, and that was all one on one. Things get tricker when more opponents are involved, or if they use magic, or if there are traps, or if reinforcements show up. Also, if the game system allows for the attainment of 100 allowing for certain "extras" that one has to pick and choose from to further customize oneself, advancement is still a element.
Anyway, this has gotten much longer than I had intended it be, so I'll wrap up here and hope I explained things better
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
JoeyNipps said
Design your world as IF it were a real one - populate it as if it were a REAL one. Then players can adventure and play in it in any manner they wish. The way ALL zoned game worlds are today forces players to play the game in a very linear manner JUST as the developer laid it out - no freedom.
Amen brother, and if anything would make me go into a rant about MMOGs and their forumlas, it is exactly this model which EQ has been shoving down everyone's throat because of how successful "the king" was. EQ literally forced people to not only play roles defined by their class and any deviation from that role labeling one as a "bad" player, but it insisted that you could only expierence the content when you had both group composition properly formed up and organization skills to manage more than one group. Seriously, how people thought this was fun is beyond me, they got caught up in the very essence of that leveling curve you mentioned in your post.
For a virtual world to be immersive, you cannot forumlate it like that. You make it all available without that hand holding of levels and charted zones. Like you Joey, I keep looking back at UO, there is a very good reason why it was able to maintain a subscriber base from day one till current day. The graphics are antiquated and yet, people still return to that game after jumping on the ride of other current games, and that's because IMHO the game play content was superior due to not relying on the level progression system. To be sure, UO had its flaws, but if you wanted to go PvP you could do so fairly quickly, taking your lumps and moving on. Not like in DAoC where level disparity made such a huge differance that you didn't even bother till you were level 50. Thus you grind-grind-grind to begin play at level 50???
I personally think that any game company who wants to develop something new should require it's programmers to play a char in UO, EQ, and DAoC from level 1 to whatever the cap is, to properly appreciate what the player base has evolved through. UO would show that freedom of virtual interest and a limited grind was its claim to success, while unmoderated PvP was it's flaw. EQ is all about the level curb consuming one till it became more work than one's work, its only claim to success is how social it was, other than that I am admittedly biased against it as I found myself hating that game. DAoC showed that faction play offers a lot of replayability, that skills trees within a class offered different play styles and could work as its claim to fame. Its downfall was that you had to grind till you cold have fun, and that populations if not managed could cause severe team imbalances. Oh, and lest I forget, when they tried to become more like EQ with their Trials of Atlantis expansion, they really took it in the shorts. Bah, I'm babbling again, time to end this post. Cheers.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Let me start off by saying Im a huge Star Trek fan. Ive played every single game ever made with a Trek label (and most were pretty bad lol). Ive gone to 6 conventions. I have a picture of me and William Shatner on my Office desk.
Anyway, with regards to the Trek mmorpg...I gotta say Im pretty disappointed that you are going to a level based system bleh. Level based games are typically dumbed down games targeted towards the teenie bopper crowd. Your target audience however (assuming its me and other trekkies) would prefer a much more sophisticated skill based game. Yes, your level system looks complex but under all those chooses lies one thing...a damage multiplier.
In a level based game gear and equipment matter very little. Thanks to a damage multiplier, I will always win against an inferior foe and always lose to a superior one (within reason). Gear and loot will never change that. Why is this important you ask ? Simple, long term appeal. Once Ive beaten the game so to speak I have little else to do in a level based game.
Case in point WoW, everyone hits the level cap of 60 and quits the game. With skill based games like Star Wars Galaxies (before they blew it with that dumbed down combat revamp) gear matters a lot. There is no damage multipler determining the outcome of a fight. I can (or could) lose to a mob, go get some loot and have it made into a better weapon, go back and defeat that same mob. In other words, I always have room to improve my character. In a level based game, thats just not true. That mob will always beat me.
Also, in a skill based game I typically can change my professions. In games like EQ, WoW, EQ2, COH, etc Im stuck once I pick my profession. What if I want to change from an engineer to security or the cpt chair ? Seems like your system like any other level one wont let me do that.
Overall, I will never ever like nor play a level based game. Theyre just too simplistic and hold no long term appeal to many. I love star trek, but Im not gonna play an EQ clone in space just because it looks like Trek. And honestly Im a bit surprised you guys are going that route. Unless you're targeting the kiddie market from WoW, I cant see the game being a huge hit.
Also, you mentioned in another post zones and making them progressively harder. I do not like that idea at all. Zones like this didnt work nor appeal in EQ2, why here ? I prefer a system similiar to WoW and old SWG where mobs got progressively harder the further away from civilization you got. And also you could find many different difficulty types in an area. Your idea causes one thing to happen, level past that area and never return again. Why would I ever go back to zone "b" if I cant get xp and everything is too low for me ? Referring to end game again, once I hit your lvl cap why would I continue to play ? Why would I ever go back to an easy zone. In SWG, I always have reasons to be on a "starter" planet like tatooine cause there are krayts (mobs way beyond a newb's ability)
Good luck and let me know if you change your mind. To me though, all Im seeing from your ideas are the same old things that come from EQ bleh. Star Trek should be an innovative game that breaks the mold like the tv shows did
Seeker: I like the point you make about making progression come in smaller increments. One often says "Ok, Im gonna kill these beasts until I hit the next level/skillpoint/whatever. If you kept hitting them, then there would be less time spend on grinding and hating every minute of it. Of course it wouldn't fix the problem in and of itself but it would go a long way.
Admriker: you should be playing EVE my friend. Spaceship based MMO targeted to adults
T.G Enterprises
ROFL I'm sorry but thats the most funniest thing i've ever heard
What a loser company who wont bring out any mmorpgs so might aswel stop now.
---------------------------------------------
Don't click here...no2
Star Trek online has the potential to be the greatest thing man has ever made (Excluding sliced bread of course) but unfortunately it also has potential to flop catastrophically. I just hope Gods and Heroes goes nicely so they will at least have the funding to do Star Trek online properly
Sorry for not replying sooner but we have been really busy over the last few days. We have changed the system somewhat, some people were wondering why we had 2 ways to gain attributes and we agree after some thought this system was flawed so we evolved it. We now are going to have 2 different sets of attributes one set isnt attributes at all but for no we call them attributes. The first set is the same as most games Strength/con/int/dex..Etc these will be gained by using weapons or certain skills. For example if you use an axe you will gain 2 stre and 1 dex per increase (This needs balancing still)
The second set will be attributes like Stealth/Toughness etc we plan on having maybe 20 different attributes here. These are the attributes you spend your points on every level up.
I hope this is explained well.
If we implement this system we are looking at having maybe 500-1000 skills. With this many skills some will no doubt end up being the same but just used with a different weapon but the majority will be very different.
We will implement some way to reduce skill points once we have worked out the cap.
Also when I said zones I didnt mean zones like EQ2 I meant the zones more like WOW. There still different zones but no zoning involved. I dont believe there should be any loading time involved with MMORPG unless its totally necessary.
I think this has answered most questions that have been asked. Everyones posts have helped us a lot. This system is still under development and all your posts help us develop it further.
Scaramoosh:
Thank you for your well thought out and constructive reply.
Gary
Director of T.G Enterprises
T.G Enterprises. Bringing you the next Great MMORPG.
Well at this point, I am a little more fully onboard. The simple fact that the company is willing to look at their system and be flexible enough within a reasonable amount to make changes while remaining as true to their vision is encouraging. Of course I will temper that with, a large percentage are willing early on. So at this point I am very interested to see what T.G comes up with, Perhaps they will suprise us and create an unthought of hybrid that takes the best of both systems and pulls them together. I will say it like this, it was really the ability to untrain skills that finally caught the majority of my attention. I must admit, there is nothing more fustrating in a game then to have a skill cap, to spend time and energy maxing that skill only to find it utterly useless, or to find it made ineffective without certain complementary skills later in the game and no way to reverse your decision. I personally am of the type I do not like to maintain multiple characters. While I have done it out of necessity I would far rather focus on one character and simply mold their skillset overtime as they evolve and as my taste's change. This I think would honestly hold far more longivity to players on the average then forcing them to reroll new characters. Do not get me wrong I think there are players that enjoy creating multiple characters, but I can think of far more who would rather keep their existing character and simple reshape the mold per se.
Now from a level based perspective, FFXI came the closest to them in my opinion with their subjob system and the ability to change jobs at any time and level them independently. Of course the downside to this was you had to pay additional money for more characters if you wanted them, which was honestly a poor decision at best. But even with that said, I would far rather have skill based.
Im a little more on-board too after that reply.
No zones is a good thing. That alone will make me give the game a shot. I still dont like a level system but I might tolerate it with so many different options to create real differences between players.
And the fact that you're looking for opinions and ideas is fantastic. So many other mmorpg devs like SOE never bother to listen.
Question...what kind of economy do you anticipate there to be ? Is there a loot system ? I recall reading that engineers will act like crafters sorta making weapons and such. Will there be loot to use to enhance crafted items ? Will there be vendors, bazarr, or some sorta auction house system to sell items ?