The last time I enjoyed Leveling or quest hubs was in Adnd 2nd edition (Pen and Paper), there leveling meant something and it took time. But I am old school, I guess.
Yes. After playing Skyrim and enjoying the game so much that I never once looked at my experience bar, its very very difficult to level up in any of these MMOs where I can't help but check my xp bar every 20 minutes or so to make sure I'm not wasting my time, lol.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Other games having levels does not phase me at all.
What dulls MMO progression for me is if the best they can do is copy the progression from another MMO. I'm not talking about just having levels. I'm talking wholesale copy+paste. Levels, skills, purple epics, quests hubs, gathering nodes, crafting, raids, dungeons, instanced pvp and more. Ever have the feeling you played this game before only it's a reskin? Ever used the term WoW clone? Progression in a lot of MMOs is like tracing a painting of the Mona Lisa then adding a mustache and hoping no one notices. It's both funny and sad. It's one thing to be slightly similar because the games are in the same genre and another to be almost exactly the same.
"You CAN'T buy ships for RL money." - MaxBacon
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
I find it bothersome personally that people so often take the misnomer that progression is somehow integral to role playing games.
As Chris Crawford puts it.
<span book"="">"In some ways, the emphasis on character development has impeded progress in storytelling with RPGs. The central premise of these [computer RPGs] is that the player steadily builds his abilities by acquiring wealth, tools, weapons, and experience. This emphasis on character development tends to work against the needs of dramatic development - dramatic twists and turns clash with the prevailing tone of steady development. Fortunately, this impediment is not fundamental to the RPG genre; it is a cultural expectation rather than an architectural necessity."
It is the very notion that a RPG is defined centrally by the progress a character makes statistically that is perhaps always been the most flawed. If the focus was on the progress of the character and world within a more narrative context, I would be much happier.
Leveling has very much so become a tired concept, one that I was never fond of to begin with, as I feel there are much better ways of generating personal progression that can come more naturally.
Though as John Kim states.
"PnP RPGs are an example of interactive narratives. The rules and fictional worlds that form the basis for these games function as a vessel for collaborative, interactive storytelling. This is possibly the most important feature of PnP RPGs, and one that CRPGs have yet to reproduce."
Interactive and collaborative narratives are something that are still eluding us, and that's an issue. You have at best a pick your adventure type situation following finite paths. That's another part of the issue, that our ability to create and develop narrative is still stunted, and in large the developer base still only think to deliver prepackaged stories.
Consequently the role playing aspect has to be picked up elsewhere, and that's usually by the meta game of statistical progress. All in all it makes for a stagnant state of affairs that I personally am not fond of.
Well, Chris' s comment's prove even people in the industry can be wrong. What he describes is adventure games as they traditionally were all about the story and had little in terms of progression.
RPGs in contrast were defined and differentiated from the adventure game by their progression mechanics. Both types of games could tell a story, but handled game play quite differently.
I'll agree, the concept of traditional leveling has been overdone, so new ways to progress are welcome, but to say a RPG doesn't need leveling means you're really talking about a different genre of game.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Originally posted by qombi Originally posted by nariusseldonOriginally posted by syriinxweird question, because progression is almost non existent in MMOs these days. they are designed to be done with progression within a month of casual play. In newer MMOs people are done with progression fast and surprise, retention is poor.
A month is long enough. For me, of course.Sure if you are playing a single player game. MMOs are about long progression. What is the difference or rushing to the top and sitting there board and playing for months with things to do. If you mean you don't want boring progression I agree. I would love entertaining dungeons at almost every few levels for groups to enjoy.
An MMO isn't a single player game you play casually for a month and then put it down, it should be years worth of fun to build a community and a world.
You can have long term character progression in an MMO where you level to maximum level in 2 weeks.
Long term progression is not exclusive to MMOs that take months or years to get to maximum level.
Also, you dont want to rush to maximum level so you wont be bored but what are you doing in an MMO that takes a long time to level up that is so interesting?
Staying in 1 zone for weeks killing the same enemies over and over and over again?
Originally posted by syriinxweird question, because progression is almost non existent in MMOs these days. they are designed to be done with progression within a month of casual play. In newer MMOs people are done with progression fast and surprise, retention is poor.
A month is long enough. For me, of course.
Sure if you are playing a single player game. MMOs are about long progression. What is the difference or rushing to the top and sitting there board and playing for months with things to do. If you mean you don't want boring progression I agree. I would love entertaining dungeons at almost every few levels for groups to enjoy.
An MMO isn't a single player game you play casually for a month and then put it down, it should be years worth of fun to build a community and a world.
You can have long term character progression in an MMO where you level to maximum level in 2 weeks.
Long term progression is not exclusive to MMOs that take months or years to get to maximum level.
Also, you dont want to rush to maximum level so you wont be bored but what are you doing in an MMO that takes a long time to level up that is so interesting?
Staying in 1 zone for weeks killing the same enemies over and over and over again?
Is that years worth of fun?
The slower game pace did seem to help form longer-lasting friendships, in my opinion. I know, who plays these games for that anymore? You can go make friends in real life...
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Originally posted by Palebane Yes. After playing Skyrim and enjoying the game so much that I never once looked at my experience bar, its very very difficult to level up in any of these MMOs where I can't help but check my xp bar every 20 minutes or so to make sure I'm not wasting my time, lol.
Dunno if you have tried it but I never ever look at my XP bar in GW2. I dont' think they have perfected this in any means since I also think levels are more or less meaningless but I certainly never worry about when I get my next ding.
Well, Chris' s comment's prove even people in the industry can be wrong. What he describes is adventure games as they traditionally were all about the story and had little in terms of progression.
RPGs in contrast were defined and differentiated from the adventure game by their progression mechanics. Both types of games could tell a story, but handled game play quite differently.
I'll agree, the concept of traditional leveling has been overdone, so new ways to progress are welcome, but to say a RPG doesn't need leveling means you're really talking about a different genre of game.
I hear what you are saying, but I'm not sure I agree. Second Life is a MMORPG that has no leveling. Though there are sub-games within the game that do involve leveling, the game is massive, online, and is almost entirely dedicated to non-combat role-playing.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Nope what has dulled my interest is leveling to cap within a couple of weeks. I want a return to near infinite progression like the original MMO's had. I don't ever expect to take 12 years to hit cap like I did in Asheron's Call, but it'd be "hella" nice. What I do expect is to take the better part of a year to reach cap. That is what I want, from the sounds of it it seems like The Elder Scrolls is going for more of this old school style progression.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
"PnP RPGs are an example of interactive narratives. The rules and fictional worlds that form the basis for these games function as a vessel for collaborative, interactive storytelling. This is possibly the most important feature of PnP RPGs, and one that CRPGs have yet to reproduce."
Interactive and collaborative narratives are something that are still eluding us, and that's an issue. You have at best a pick your adventure type situation following finite paths. That's another part of the issue, that our ability to create and develop narrative is still stunted, and in large the developer base still only think to deliver prepackaged stories.
I think these are all truthfull points. But we don't really have an idea problem with MMOs. We want them to play like a good PnP RPG with the server replacing a master dungeon master. The problem is we can't even COME CLOSE to this kind of story telling ability with canned narratives.
it's an execution problem really. Every player has good ideas how to make MMOs better - the issue is its well beyond the ability of the developer. GW2 is a prime example of this. What they were talking about sounded great. Hey there these dynamic events where you can change the course of the world - and the entire zone. You don't need good gear or raiding because you are participating in a story driven world..
But what we got were escort quests that you can join anytime. i think overall its a small step up from traditonal quests hubs don't get me wrong. But its not enough to make up for the loss of the Holy Grail and the 'easy coordination' that comes from that..
EQN seems to be one of those baby with the bathwater kind of efforts much like Guild Wars 2. There is nothing wrong with taking a modest step forward with combat and AI for these kind of games. Implement an AI like Skyrims Radiant AI that works for an MMO and a combat system like Teras - and you already have a hit.
Thinking that you can mimic a dungeon master is just folly. Though I wouldn't mind being wrong..
EQN is the future to be honest, even if they can't pull it off themselves. THe current model is simply broken, you can't tell a story with one story board or even 2 or 3 and that is the best we can do at this moment. If you want to tell the story of an orc fortress in EQ or SWTOR or whatever you can tell it with one story board, this is just how the fortress always in. Switch to WoW and you can use two, this is how it is before you do a quest and then after the quest it phases to something else. Go to GW2 and suddenly you have 3 story boards, this is how it is when the orcs own it, this is how it is when the humans own it and this how it is when it is contested. EQN attemps to make you tell the story with unlimited story boards, the AI driving spawn locations and the players driving the content means you simply cannot map what is going to happen.
It isn't likely that the first game to try this works but down the road this is likely the future of MMORPG. It is sad to me that the computer has made the genre more dumbed down, we have all this technology at our fingertips and we've made combat more simplified, the narrative more simplified and the character design more simplified. The MMORPG has completely failed to this point and it is time for a change.
Well, Chris' s comment's prove even people in the industry can be wrong. What he describes is adventure games as they traditionally were all about the story and had little in terms of progression.
RPGs in contrast were defined and differentiated from the adventure game by their progression mechanics. Both types of games could tell a story, but handled game play quite differently.
I'll agree, the concept of traditional leveling has been overdone, so new ways to progress are welcome, but to say a RPG doesn't need leveling means you're really talking about a different genre of game.
This is actually only half right at best. Progression only really defines RPGs in the context of MMOs and some other computer games.
The core of RPGs as a global genre is very close to it's namesake.
Role Playing Game
What an RPG used to be fundamentally is a collaborative and interactive narrative experience. It has absolutely nothing to do with statistical mechanics or personal character progression on a meta-gaming level.
You're also incorrect on the RPG versus Action game element, as the differentiating factor was not progression mechanics, but rather that adventure games generally removed most or any meta statistic, strong action elements, or larger communal aspects to focus on a single narrative usually with more puzzle and explorative elements.
His quote is perfectly right, because his commentary is pointed at how the RPG genre basically saw a shift when if went to virtual games that removed a lot of that interactive and collaborative elements.
What you described was a result of the fallout from this change.
It's this shift that has also damaged the ability for mechanics in MMOs to reasonably progress into more complete virtual worlds. You saw a bit of it in earlier titles when the community was smaller and developers more directly interacted with the player base, enabling unique events that could move the world and story forward in a free-form manner.
And I agree Clinchy.
Kind of an extension off my " That's another part of the issue, that our ability to create and develop narrative is still stunted, and in large the developer base still only think to deliver prepackaged stories." commentary.
The thing I meant about the developer still thinking to deliver packaged stories is that they have not sought to create a more decentralized form of storytelling. They have a core narrative that they carry players through, rather than creating story elements that players can use to generate the narrative as they play.
GW2 is a great example of that, yes.They touted a dynamic environment and delivered predefined toggleable states. They still heavily rely on the core story being a narrative they carry you through, rather than letting you as a player pick up the torch and carry it yourself.
RPG design needs to look for different means to look at role playing, and find ways to deliver on the collaborative and interactive narrative experience that traditional RPGs were built upon.
Yeah, replacing a DM is still damn near impossible, but we can at least put our focus back on creative elements and less on meta elements.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
What an RPG used to be fundamentally is a collaborative and interactive narrative experience. It has absolutely nothing to do with statistical mechanics or personal character progression on a meta-gaming level.
Anyone who has ever played a pnp rpg understands this point. But many of those who never have frequently confuse the rules and the game. They mistake the glass for the wine. This situation isn't surprising. Computers are good with numbers; it was inevitable that crpgs would evolve into a genre where stat and inventory management were emphasized above everything else. For some people this seems to be enough, and good for them. Unfortunately for the rest of us, computers have the imaginative capacity of a potato and can never replace a human DM. The best that developers can do is provide players with the tools to generate and run their own content. It is encouraging to see them finally begin to take baby steps in this direction.
No. It was never a factor for me so I could honestly care less if the next MMO has level progression or not. If it works for their intents and purposes then that's fine. Not every thing has to change to be "next-gen".
Modern MMORPG's are twisted forms of traditional PnP. You have an event happen and you progress or you kill something and progress. We're essentially playing flunky online. Go see your taskmasters from level 1 to whatever spin the wheel on 1-7 quest types and proceed to the next level area.
The problem with MMORPG's is that the story being told takes a back seat and simply a vessel to character progression. Character progression by human nature and by bad design becomes the whole game. Overtime developers have started to cut out everything that impedes or can't be related to character progression. Who needs open worlds, community, difficulty, downtime, sandbox or anything that doesn't involve fast leveling? Lets just funnel players down a story to the end game because by right players will tire of the same content sooner or later.
Why I support Sandbox elements and skill based systems is that you actually get to play your character how you want. The story doesn't define your character, your actions do. I think having abilities separate from skills with skill requirements helps with balance to push players away from having the same skills. You can even have meaningless levels over top the skills. You then don't lose content like you do in leveling games. You "beat" a zone there's never a reason to come back because your tiered leveling power make you untouchable any threat there if you can even go back. That 90 foot demon now hits you with nerf bat power. You don't have area's off limits because you just beat the instance or out leveled it. You don't go yet because you'll get your ass kicked.
You can still have quest in skill based games. But generally you'll do it because you want to or like the story or could come to like the story. After you 10th taskmaster gives you 1-7 quest how many actually care what your doing and not just following the GPS to kill or click something?
Originally posted by mmoguy43 I know for me it has. It is like every game now has some form of character progression, usually in the form of levels, that I can't even remember the last time I was excited to level up or get skill advancements. Everything seems to have barrowed some from RPGs that it's own genre doesn't feel adequate.
"It isn't likely that the first game to try this works but down the road this is likely the future of MMORPG. It is sad to me that the computer has made the genre more dumbed down, we have all this technology at our fingertips and we've made combat more simplified, the narrative more simplified and the character design more simplified. The MMORPG has completely failed to this point and it is time for a change."
We would need basic advances in the world of computer science.. This is the problem with the EQN idea - I don't think the technology is there. Hopefully I am wrong. Its free to play so I will give it a shot. I am thinking its going to be like that Black and White game which promised so much - but delievered so little.
The basic idea though is of course a good one - and one that everyone has really wanted to implement forever now. Developers would love it if different stories could spring up from one set of rules. At this point though I have noticed my Roomba gets stuck on the same Ikea chair leg every single day. So forgive me if I doubt the intelligence of machines..
Yes thats' right a cat is a veritable rocket scientist compared to the 'smartest' computer as near as I can tell. Get a cat - they are way more inventive the an MMO at this point - and I don't see that changing.
What an RPG used to be fundamentally is a collaborative and interactive narrative experience. It has absolutely nothing to do with statistical mechanics or personal character progression on a meta-gaming level.
Anyone who has ever played a pnp rpg understands this point. But many of those who never have frequently confuse the rules and the game. They mistake the glass for the wine. This situation isn't surprising. Computers are good with numbers; it was inevitable that crpgs would evolve into a genre where stat and inventory management were emphasized above everything else. For some people this seems to be enough, and good for them. Unfortunately for the rest of us, computers have the imaginative capacity of a potato and can never replace a human DM. The best that developers can do is provide players with the tools to generate and run their own content. It is encouraging to see them finally begin to take baby steps in this direction.
nah they are just different, not worst.
I would much rather have good pre-set stories and mechanics, then relying on a quirky human DM. It is about having fun, and an interactive narrative experience is not necessarily better if the DM sucks.
Originally posted by mmoguy43 I know for me it has. It is like every game now has some form of character progression, usually in the form of levels, that I can't even remember the last time I was excited to level up or get skill advancements. Everything seems to have barrowed some from RPGs that it's own genre doesn't feel adequate.
I feel the opposite and is actually the reason why I like to play MMOs. What I don't like is the linear quest progression. I would much rather prefer that quests exist and I find and do them as a I see fit. They can leverage the same skill upgrade mechanic (but would love to see customization again).
I just recently maxed my first character in WOW and its like a completely different game. I guess its more psychological than actual, as even though I'm doing the exact same thing as I did before it feels more at my pace. The progression path opened horizontally. And one thing I noticed is I don't miss getting new levels (as I thought I would).
It would be better is levelling was PART of max level instead of a path to get there.
UO is the only game i"ve played that has master the ability to keep your character changing frequently enough that it doesn't feel like a grind but took long enough to get to "max" that it was a challenge.
Leveling has made games more streamlined and monotone. Here's an analogy.
You make really good hamburgers and they start getting popular. They are juicy, thick, handmade, grilled to perfection. As your company grows and gets more popular you try to save money. To do this you start to have the ingredients shipped in frozen, then thawed out and heated under lamps. People like them even more. Finally you create a system where you have the items heavily preserved, hormone and antibiotic infused, frozen, then thawed under lamps, wrapped in generic plastic, and served in a small box.
People strangely still love it.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
Yes, without question. TSW changed how I felt about traditional levels. Age of Wushu did away with questing for levels entirely (as did EVE years before) and made the concept of levels abstract.
I can never go back to a quest to cap game no matter how much I try. That design is old and tired. I won't/can't do it.
Now that being said, I LOVE progression. I love my time spent meaning something. I just wont do questing for progression.
Old UO comes to mind. I knew someone in 2001 that raised magery naturally in UO without using any type of macro. Just played the game the way it was meant to be played. Took him a whole 3 years to GM it.
Find a game now a days that takes 3 years to reach the pinnacle of progression.
Originally posted by Southkrypt The last time I enjoyed Leveling or quest hubs was in Adnd 2nd edition (Pen and Paper), there leveling meant something and it took time. But I am old school, I guess.
Actually, in Pen and Paper RPGs, leveling means almost NOTHING. Depending on the skill of your dungeon master, you could have awesome adventures at level 1 and utterly bad ones at max level.
My best memories of Pen and Paper are with low level characters but awesome DMs.
I had to comment on this. When I played AD&D with my friends we almost never gained any levels with any of our characters. We never even tried to keep track of the experience we should have gained when we killed stuff or disarmed traps or whatever. Generally we would just roll up whatever level character the DM had set up his scenario for and play that guy at that fixed level for the duration and then make a new guy for the next adventure. We just didn't bother with levels and yet we still had a lot of fun playing.
We eventually starting using our own made up set of rules which didn't have levels at all and...hey, it worked for us. It really wasn't about character progression at all. It was about the adventure in part and in part it was the creative fun of interactive storytelling.
And that's really what those old P&P games were---group storytelling with dice rolls to resolve questions of how the story should go. For example: I might say that I sneaked through the back door of that building without anyone noticing but the DM says those people across the street might have seen me. So we roll dice to see which way the story pivots at that point of contention.
Geez, now I feel kind of depressed that I'll never do that again. It was fun way back when.
Comments
Yes. After playing Skyrim and enjoying the game so much that I never once looked at my experience bar, its very very difficult to level up in any of these MMOs where I can't help but check my xp bar every 20 minutes or so to make sure I'm not wasting my time, lol.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Other games having levels does not phase me at all.
What dulls MMO progression for me is if the best they can do is copy the progression from another MMO. I'm not talking about just having levels. I'm talking wholesale copy+paste. Levels, skills, purple epics, quests hubs, gathering nodes, crafting, raids, dungeons, instanced pvp and more. Ever have the feeling you played this game before only it's a reskin? Ever used the term WoW clone? Progression in a lot of MMOs is like tracing a painting of the Mona Lisa then adding a mustache and hoping no one notices. It's both funny and sad. It's one thing to be slightly similar because the games are in the same genre and another to be almost exactly the same.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Well, Chris' s comment's prove even people in the industry can be wrong. What he describes is adventure games as they traditionally were all about the story and had little in terms of progression.
RPGs in contrast were defined and differentiated from the adventure game by their progression mechanics. Both types of games could tell a story, but handled game play quite differently.
I'll agree, the concept of traditional leveling has been overdone, so new ways to progress are welcome, but to say a RPG doesn't need leveling means you're really talking about a different genre of game.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Sure if you are playing a single player game. MMOs are about long progression. What is the difference or rushing to the top and sitting there board and playing for months with things to do. If you mean you don't want boring progression I agree. I would love entertaining dungeons at almost every few levels for groups to enjoy.
An MMO isn't a single player game you play casually for a month and then put it down, it should be years worth of fun to build a community and a world.
You can have long term character progression in an MMO where you level to maximum level in 2 weeks.
Long term progression is not exclusive to MMOs that take months or years to get to maximum level.
Also, you dont want to rush to maximum level so you wont be bored but what are you doing in an MMO that takes a long time to level up that is so interesting?
Staying in 1 zone for weeks killing the same enemies over and over and over again?
Is that years worth of fun?
The slower game pace did seem to help form longer-lasting friendships, in my opinion. I know, who plays these games for that anymore? You can go make friends in real life...
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Dunno if you have tried it but I never ever look at my XP bar in GW2. I dont' think they have perfected this in any means since I also think levels are more or less meaningless but I certainly never worry about when I get my next ding.
I hear what you are saying, but I'm not sure I agree. Second Life is a MMORPG that has no leveling. Though there are sub-games within the game that do involve leveling, the game is massive, online, and is almost entirely dedicated to non-combat role-playing.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
"PnP RPGs are an example of interactive narratives. The rules and fictional worlds that form the basis for these games function as a vessel for collaborative, interactive storytelling. This is possibly the most important feature of PnP RPGs, and one that CRPGs have yet to reproduce."
Interactive and collaborative narratives are something that are still eluding us, and that's an issue. You have at best a pick your adventure type situation following finite paths. That's another part of the issue, that our ability to create and develop narrative is still stunted, and in large the developer base still only think to deliver prepackaged stories.
I think these are all truthfull points. But we don't really have an idea problem with MMOs. We want them to play like a good PnP RPG with the server replacing a master dungeon master. The problem is we can't even COME CLOSE to this kind of story telling ability with canned narratives.
it's an execution problem really. Every player has good ideas how to make MMOs better - the issue is its well beyond the ability of the developer. GW2 is a prime example of this. What they were talking about sounded great. Hey there these dynamic events where you can change the course of the world - and the entire zone. You don't need good gear or raiding because you are participating in a story driven world..
But what we got were escort quests that you can join anytime. i think overall its a small step up from traditonal quests hubs don't get me wrong. But its not enough to make up for the loss of the Holy Grail and the 'easy coordination' that comes from that..
EQN seems to be one of those baby with the bathwater kind of efforts much like Guild Wars 2. There is nothing wrong with taking a modest step forward with combat and AI for these kind of games. Implement an AI like Skyrims Radiant AI that works for an MMO and a combat system like Teras - and you already have a hit.
Thinking that you can mimic a dungeon master is just folly. Though I wouldn't mind being wrong..
EQN is the future to be honest, even if they can't pull it off themselves. THe current model is simply broken, you can't tell a story with one story board or even 2 or 3 and that is the best we can do at this moment. If you want to tell the story of an orc fortress in EQ or SWTOR or whatever you can tell it with one story board, this is just how the fortress always in. Switch to WoW and you can use two, this is how it is before you do a quest and then after the quest it phases to something else. Go to GW2 and suddenly you have 3 story boards, this is how it is when the orcs own it, this is how it is when the humans own it and this how it is when it is contested. EQN attemps to make you tell the story with unlimited story boards, the AI driving spawn locations and the players driving the content means you simply cannot map what is going to happen.
It isn't likely that the first game to try this works but down the road this is likely the future of MMORPG. It is sad to me that the computer has made the genre more dumbed down, we have all this technology at our fingertips and we've made combat more simplified, the narrative more simplified and the character design more simplified. The MMORPG has completely failed to this point and it is time for a change.
This is actually only half right at best. Progression only really defines RPGs in the context of MMOs and some other computer games.
The core of RPGs as a global genre is very close to it's namesake.
Role Playing Game
What an RPG used to be fundamentally is a collaborative and interactive narrative experience. It has absolutely nothing to do with statistical mechanics or personal character progression on a meta-gaming level.
You're also incorrect on the RPG versus Action game element, as the differentiating factor was not progression mechanics, but rather that adventure games generally removed most or any meta statistic, strong action elements, or larger communal aspects to focus on a single narrative usually with more puzzle and explorative elements.
His quote is perfectly right, because his commentary is pointed at how the RPG genre basically saw a shift when if went to virtual games that removed a lot of that interactive and collaborative elements.
What you described was a result of the fallout from this change.
It's this shift that has also damaged the ability for mechanics in MMOs to reasonably progress into more complete virtual worlds. You saw a bit of it in earlier titles when the community was smaller and developers more directly interacted with the player base, enabling unique events that could move the world and story forward in a free-form manner.
And I agree Clinchy.
Kind of an extension off my " That's another part of the issue, that our ability to create and develop narrative is still stunted, and in large the developer base still only think to deliver prepackaged stories." commentary.
The thing I meant about the developer still thinking to deliver packaged stories is that they have not sought to create a more decentralized form of storytelling. They have a core narrative that they carry players through, rather than creating story elements that players can use to generate the narrative as they play.
GW2 is a great example of that, yes.They touted a dynamic environment and delivered predefined toggleable states. They still heavily rely on the core story being a narrative they carry you through, rather than letting you as a player pick up the torch and carry it yourself.
RPG design needs to look for different means to look at role playing, and find ways to deliver on the collaborative and interactive narrative experience that traditional RPGs were built upon.
Yeah, replacing a DM is still damn near impossible, but we can at least put our focus back on creative elements and less on meta elements.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Anyone who has ever played a pnp rpg understands this point. But many of those who never have frequently confuse the rules and the game. They mistake the glass for the wine. This situation isn't surprising. Computers are good with numbers; it was inevitable that crpgs would evolve into a genre where stat and inventory management were emphasized above everything else. For some people this seems to be enough, and good for them. Unfortunately for the rest of us, computers have the imaginative capacity of a potato and can never replace a human DM. The best that developers can do is provide players with the tools to generate and run their own content. It is encouraging to see them finally begin to take baby steps in this direction.
Modern MMORPG's are twisted forms of traditional PnP. You have an event happen and you progress or you kill something and progress. We're essentially playing flunky online. Go see your taskmasters from level 1 to whatever spin the wheel on 1-7 quest types and proceed to the next level area.
The problem with MMORPG's is that the story being told takes a back seat and simply a vessel to character progression. Character progression by human nature and by bad design becomes the whole game. Overtime developers have started to cut out everything that impedes or can't be related to character progression. Who needs open worlds, community, difficulty, downtime, sandbox or anything that doesn't involve fast leveling? Lets just funnel players down a story to the end game because by right players will tire of the same content sooner or later.
Why I support Sandbox elements and skill based systems is that you actually get to play your character how you want. The story doesn't define your character, your actions do. I think having abilities separate from skills with skill requirements helps with balance to push players away from having the same skills. You can even have meaningless levels over top the skills. You then don't lose content like you do in leveling games. You "beat" a zone there's never a reason to come back because your tiered leveling power make you untouchable any threat there if you can even go back. That 90 foot demon now hits you with nerf bat power. You don't have area's off limits because you just beat the instance or out leveled it. You don't go yet because you'll get your ass kicked.
You can still have quest in skill based games. But generally you'll do it because you want to or like the story or could come to like the story. After you 10th taskmaster gives you 1-7 quest how many actually care what your doing and not just following the GPS to kill or click something?
Too Much Exposure.
"It isn't likely that the first game to try this works but down the road this is likely the future of MMORPG. It is sad to me that the computer has made the genre more dumbed down, we have all this technology at our fingertips and we've made combat more simplified, the narrative more simplified and the character design more simplified. The MMORPG has completely failed to this point and it is time for a change."
We would need basic advances in the world of computer science.. This is the problem with the EQN idea - I don't think the technology is there. Hopefully I am wrong. Its free to play so I will give it a shot. I am thinking its going to be like that Black and White game which promised so much - but delievered so little.
The basic idea though is of course a good one - and one that everyone has really wanted to implement forever now. Developers would love it if different stories could spring up from one set of rules. At this point though I have noticed my Roomba gets stuck on the same Ikea chair leg every single day. So forgive me if I doubt the intelligence of machines..
Yes thats' right a cat is a veritable rocket scientist compared to the 'smartest' computer as near as I can tell. Get a cat - they are way more inventive the an MMO at this point - and I don't see that changing.
nah they are just different, not worst.
I would much rather have good pre-set stories and mechanics, then relying on a quirky human DM. It is about having fun, and an interactive narrative experience is not necessarily better if the DM sucks.
I feel the opposite and is actually the reason why I like to play MMOs. What I don't like is the linear quest progression. I would much rather prefer that quests exist and I find and do them as a I see fit. They can leverage the same skill upgrade mechanic (but would love to see customization again).
I just recently maxed my first character in WOW and its like a completely different game. I guess its more psychological than actual, as even though I'm doing the exact same thing as I did before it feels more at my pace. The progression path opened horizontally. And one thing I noticed is I don't miss getting new levels (as I thought I would).
It would be better is levelling was PART of max level instead of a path to get there.
Leveling has made games more streamlined and monotone. Here's an analogy.
You make really good hamburgers and they start getting popular. They are juicy, thick, handmade, grilled to perfection. As your company grows and gets more popular you try to save money. To do this you start to have the ingredients shipped in frozen, then thawed out and heated under lamps. People like them even more. Finally you create a system where you have the items heavily preserved, hormone and antibiotic infused, frozen, then thawed under lamps, wrapped in generic plastic, and served in a small box.
People strangely still love it.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
Leveling more like how to make your character stronger.
Need new interest ways to raise character's stats , current quests hub and monster grind are boring.
Old UO comes to mind. I knew someone in 2001 that raised magery naturally in UO without using any type of macro. Just played the game the way it was meant to be played. Took him a whole 3 years to GM it.
Find a game now a days that takes 3 years to reach the pinnacle of progression.
I had to comment on this. When I played AD&D with my friends we almost never gained any levels with any of our characters. We never even tried to keep track of the experience we should have gained when we killed stuff or disarmed traps or whatever. Generally we would just roll up whatever level character the DM had set up his scenario for and play that guy at that fixed level for the duration and then make a new guy for the next adventure. We just didn't bother with levels and yet we still had a lot of fun playing.
We eventually starting using our own made up set of rules which didn't have levels at all and...hey, it worked for us. It really wasn't about character progression at all. It was about the adventure in part and in part it was the creative fun of interactive storytelling.
And that's really what those old P&P games were---group storytelling with dice rolls to resolve questions of how the story should go. For example: I might say that I sneaked through the back door of that building without anyone noticing but the DM says those people across the street might have seen me. So we roll dice to see which way the story pivots at that point of contention.
Geez, now I feel kind of depressed that I'll never do that again. It was fun way back when.