i am reading the thread and i do agree with most what is said, especially that leveling (or other progress) should take really long time or even better be unlimited (i am known for hating even the idea of mmorpg endgame), but guys, that was not the OP question.
TSW sort of did this. Technically, there are no levels but you do need quite a bit of player skill to progress. They call it horizontal progression. Most players in TSW will hit a wall (hard) in Blue Mountain, the third location you'll end up in after the beginner areas. The only way to continue successfully past Blue Mountain is to learn the ability wheel and adjust as needed. So, yeah, TSW does actually require some player skill if you ever want to be successful at it.
And the result of that is a lot of complaining. Google "tsw blue mountain too hard" and you'll get over 40,000 hits. A lot of people rage-quit at that point. So my guess would be that making leveling more difficult by requiring greater player skill would be a massive failure for whichever game tried it.
Not really, TSW had gear level unlocks which acted like levels for bits of equipment. If it just had the ability wheel and no power progression then that might have been the case.
TSW is indeed very gear dependent, which is why I said "sort of". But it still requires a good amount of skill at knowing how to handle a fight. You can't just go from one fight to the next with the same build. For example, fighting the fungus things for the quest "The Wild Hunt" will be disastrous if you run an Affliction (DoT) heavy build. My point being, you can't just slap on the best gear and click away. It requires some though or at least, Googling for an effective build.
Anyway, I don' think there's any game that fits the OPs thoughts and I don't think there ever will be.
Originally posted by Benedikt i am reading the thread and i do agree with most what is said, especially that leveling (or other progress) should take really long time or even better be unlimited (i am known for hating even the idea of mmorpg endgame), but guys, that was not the OP question.
Good point. I think the OP was suggesting something more along the lines of levelling as overcoming a level of difficulty, rather than, at worst, levelling like "Make Love, not Warcraft". "no matter what, I'll eventually get that next level, if I have to kill a million lvl1 cows to do it!"
I wonder how a system like that would work. Experience points would be out the door; there would have to be some kind of event that you'd have to succeed at in order to level. Essentially it's a single player concept. You'd have to beat Glass Joe and Piston Hurricane to get to Bald Bull , right?
It's one thing to have difficult end game content as people can work together to overcome (and yes, many people do get carried).
But the question that I always have when someone suggests skill-based gating to fundamental aspects of RPG's (like leveling), I say "Sure, but challenge/difficultly according to whom?"
There's always going to be a cut-off level of difficulty, people talk about how "there would be lots of outcry on forums" but what if YOU were below the cut-off? And I don't mean in a, oh you can just practice and get better and overcome, kind of way. I mean in a, you simply are not capable of playing at a level to advance.
A person likes to think of themselves are greatly capable and of others are woefully incompetent, but the reality is that the skill barrier could in fact be beyond your reach if a system like this was implemented. How long would you try before giving up?
The truth about ideas like these is the sub-text inherent in all of them. "Please make the game just easy enough so that my friends and I can beat the content, but difficult enough to prevent "others" from being able to advance to our level."
I'd love to see a game with legitimately difficult content, and I do mean far above the level at which most people are capable of - just to see how many of the tough guys crumble. I remember when Cataclysm came out and heroics were tuned pretty tightly, finding people capable of completing them was a challenge. It was as if my entire guild suddenly became peace-loving crafters who just wanted to level alts and didn't care about progression anymore. It was really funny. And the forums, oh the forums. All those people blathering on about how they wanted challenge back in the game, they got it and then they cried because the sub-text I mentioned earlier wasn't being met.
"Make it easy enough for me, but make it difficult for others."
This conversation reminds me of various dota2 forums where Invoker gets discussed. Invariably someone calls him the hardest to master and someone calls him easy-mode. He has a built in skill floor that a great number of players just can't overcome. People who can, don't think it's difficult to accomplish. People who can't, consider the hero extremely difficult.
But then you move past the skill floor and look at the skill ceiling. Very few people are capable of playing Invoker at or near the skill ceiling. No other hero demands as much presence of mind to know which spell is best at that given moment, what they will want next, what they still have on cooldown, how the battlefield is changing in real time and how to react to it by changing their next choice, and being able to execute while not dying/being cc'd.
Yet, despite all that. A large number of people who do play him, will continue to call him easy mode because they know a couple of combos and builds. This is WoW syndrome. People who have moved past the skill floor but are unable to either attain or even see how far they themselves are from the skill ceiling. You hear it all the time, "all you need to do is learn your rotation and stay out of the bad." Congrats on moving past the skill floor.
Competitive guilds do the hardest content in gear that the bulk of these "Everything is so easy" players can barely succeed doing LFR in.
In any case, I will continue to have the same question any time this idea is brought up. "Difficult according to whom?"
It's one thing to have difficult end game content as people can work together to overcome (and yes, many people do get carried).
But the question that I always have when someone suggests skill-based gating to fundamental aspects of RPG's (like leveling), I say "Sure, but challenge/difficultly according to whom?"
There's always going to be a cut-off level of difficulty, people talk about how "there would be lots of outcry on forums" but what if YOU were below the cut-off? And I don't mean in a, oh you can just practice and get better and overcome, kind of way. I mean in a, you simply are not capable of playing at a level to advance.
A person likes to think of themselves are greatly capable and of others are woefully incompetent, but the reality is that the skill barrier could in fact be beyond your reach if a system like this was implemented. How long would you try before giving up?
The truth about ideas like these is the sub-text inherent in all of them. "Please make the game just easy enough so that my friends and I can beat the content, but difficult enough to prevent "others" from being able to advance to our level."
I'd love to see a game with legitimately difficult content, and I do mean far above the level at which most people are capable of - just to see how many of the tough guys crumble. I remember when Cataclysm came out and heroics were tuned pretty tightly, finding people capable of completing them was a challenge. It was as if my entire guild suddenly became peace-loving crafters who just wanted to level alts and didn't care about progression anymore. It was really funny. And the forums, oh the forums. All those people blathering on about how they wanted challenge back in the game, they got it and then they cried because the sub-text I mentioned earlier wasn't being met.
"Make it easy enough for me, but make it difficult for others."
This conversation reminds me of various dota2 forums where Invoker gets discussed. Invariably someone calls him the hardest to master and someone calls him easy-mode. He has a built in skill floor that a great number of players just can't overcome. People who can, don't think it's difficult to accomplish. People who can't, consider the hero extremely difficult.
But then you move past the skill floor and look at the skill ceiling. Very few people are capable of playing Invoker at or near the skill ceiling. No other hero demands as much presence of mind to know which spell is best at that given moment, what they will want next, what they still have on cooldown, how the battlefield is changing in real time and how to react to it by changing their next choice, and being able to execute while not dying/being cc'd.
Yet, despite all that. A large number of people who do play him, will continue to call him easy mode because they know a couple of combos and builds. This is WoW syndrome. People who have moved past the skill floor but are unable to either attain or even see how far they themselves are from the skill ceiling. You hear it all the time, "all you need to do is learn your rotation and stay out of the bad." Congrats on moving past the skill floor.
Competitive guilds do the hardest content in gear that the bulk of these "Everything is so easy" players can barely succeed doing LFR in.
In any case, I will continue to have the same question any time this idea is brought up. "Difficult according to whom?"
Difficult or too time consuming?
Skill based games are a little different than progression based.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
I would argue that levels, as they originally existed, are a largely obsolete concept, just one number in a spawling suite of different avenues of progression (story, gear, rep, collections, achievements, rankings, etc) that involves both plateaus to aim for and endless grinds to delve into. Having a character level at all is just a piece of historical baggage in peoples' expectations.
I agree. They are a role playing tool in a role playing game.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
That bugs me. Is that what gaming has been reduced to, "I paid my dues so I deserve to win"? Do we walk into a martial arts dojo and say, "I paid my membership fee now where's my black belt".
Yes. It is entertainment, built on illusion of achievement.
If you want real achievement, go get a black belt, or an advance degree. Games are not where you find it.
It would not be very good entertainment if half of the population do not even see the end of the content. Can you imagine a SP game that most players don't see the ending?
Can you define a "real achievement" for me? Considering you were advocating videos games are sports, that's an interesting position to take. Was winning the $1,000,000 prize in the LoL championship a "real achievement"?
Define? I can give you examples:
- publish a scientific paper
- create a successful product
- write and publish a novel
... and sure .. winning a LoL championship is a real achievement, just like winning the world championship of say ping-pong. But playing some ping-pong with a friend does not count, even if you beat him day in and day out.
That bugs me. Is that what gaming has been reduced to, "I paid my dues so I deserve to win"? Do we walk into a martial arts dojo and say, "I paid my membership fee now where's my black belt".
Yes. It is entertainment, built on illusion of achievement.
If you want real achievement, go get a black belt, or an advance degree. Games are not where you find it.
It would not be very good entertainment if half of the population do not even see the end of the content. Can you imagine a SP game that most players don't see the ending?
Can you define a "real achievement" for me? Considering you were advocating videos games are sports, that's an interesting position to take. Was winning the $1,000,000 prize in the LoL championship a "real achievement"?
Define? I can give you examples:
- publish a scientific paper
- create a successful product
- write and publish a novel
... and sure .. winning a LoL championship is a real achievement, just like winning the world championship of say ping-pong. But playing some ping-pong with a friend does not count, even if you beat him day in and day out.
Which committee decides what counts?
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
That bugs me. Is that what gaming has been reduced to, "I paid my dues so I deserve to win"? Do we walk into a martial arts dojo and say, "I paid my membership fee now where's my black belt".
Yes. It is entertainment, built on illusion of achievement.
If you want real achievement, go get a black belt, or an advance degree. Games are not where you find it.
It would not be very good entertainment if half of the population do not even see the end of the content. Can you imagine a SP game that most players don't see the ending?
I think it would be fine in a sandbox sort of game. As mentioned earlier, there were MUDD's that didn't have caps. I remember Dragonrealms was like that, at least when I played it back in the 90's. the game is still going to this day so there is a market for that sort of thing.
But yeah, I agree... at least in regards a theme park(at least the way they're built, now) that had no cap probably wouldn't work. You'd probably have a bunch of people on unemployment grinding 24/7 with nothing to do but PvP with other unemployed Crystal Meth users, with no one else wanting anything to do with it.
I like the system in Eve, though. There's only so much you can train to for any given ship or its components. And even then, the rock/paper/scissors way the ships and loadout work make it interesting.
I think this is a bad attitude. You first assume that people who want to spend time at something are unemployed. Then you say they are all crystal meth users. These are all assumptions. Even if they were what is it to you? Maybe it's just a lot of people who really like to play a certain game. I see to many people on this board who say don't criticize my choice of wanting cash shop and easy solo play. Then they turn around and try to insult you for wanting something different yourself.
My apologies, as that's not how I intended it.
I don't mean that people who'd want to spend alot of time playing the game are unemployed. What I'm saying is, those who will have the most time to play the game will BE unemployed people. You may want to spend time developing a character, but so long as you have a job and other commitments, you're going to lag way behind someone who is unemployed, therefore can play all the time. Same thing for the meth reference, as you'll be able to advance faster if you don't have to deal with all that "sleep" nonsense.
I wasn't meaning at all to slander people who devote alot of free time to these games(I've certainly devoted no shortage of time playing, myself), and looking back on what I typed I can see how a person might think that, so again I apologize.
What you are saying is correct, but if you have better things to do why play MMORPGs? Why force them to become something you are able to play because you don't have the time to do it? I think that is the reason MMOs are the way they are right now. Because people wanted them that way and complained a lot. It could be because they played MMOs before and now don't have time or that they feel their time is spent elsewhere. The issue is that there are plenty of great single player and co op games out there to play that fulfill most of the requirements said players ask for. Even mass PvP combat on a level playing field with FPS combat is available in non MMO games. For some reason people want to remove what an MMO is all about for no real good reason IMO.
They aren't forcing the games to become something else. The devs are changing the game to attract them. The devs are chasing the customer not the other way around.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
That bugs me. Is that what gaming has been reduced to, "I paid my dues so I deserve to win"? Do we walk into a martial arts dojo and say, "I paid my membership fee now where's my black belt".
Yes. It is entertainment, built on illusion of achievement.
If you want real achievement, go get a black belt, or an advance degree. Games are not where you find it.
It would not be very good entertainment if half of the population do not even see the end of the content. Can you imagine a SP game that most players don't see the ending?
Can you define a "real achievement" for me? Considering you were advocating videos games are sports, that's an interesting position to take. Was winning the $1,000,000 prize in the LoL championship a "real achievement"?
Define? I can give you examples:
- publish a scientific paper
- create a successful product
- write and publish a novel
... and sure .. winning a LoL championship is a real achievement, just like winning the world championship of say ping-pong. But playing some ping-pong with a friend does not count, even if you beat him day in and day out.
Which committee decides what counts?
Mine, of course.
If you think killing a raid boss in a game is an achievement, I will just laugh and be glad that you are not my son. But yes, you do have the prerogative to decide that if doing something in a video game that the devs allow you to do is a "real" achievement.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar They aren't forcing the games to become something else. The devs are changing the game to attract them. The devs are chasing the customer not the other way around.
This ^^^
Some just don't understand.
I am a good example. I wouldn't care less if MMO changes. I like Diablo 3. If MMOs are more like D3, i may give them a look. But if they don't ... i have D3, and many other games to play.
However, it is the devs who seem to want my business .. if so, i am no problem stating my preferences. They can decide if they want to cater to me.
I always that it was more of a personal preference then a " goal " (which in it's own is a personal preference on its own )
if u just play the game to rush the max lvl, in my opinion you're doing it wrong, reaching max lvl is always the " end(?) " goal, but the road there is how u want it, for me, i like to enjoy, explore, quest, get some good lore, dungeons, crafting and after all that maby reach max lvl, but by then i could already be playing my 4'th character.
Maybe those little number's on the UI should be your toon's age instead of level and your toon died an old cantankerous death when they hit 85. People probably wouldn't rush so quick to get there and you could literally call it the end game.
I don't mean that people who'd want to spend alot of time playing the game are unemployed. What I'm saying is, those who will have the most time to play the game will BE unemployed people. You may want to spend time developing a character, but so long as you have a job and other commitments, you're going to lag way behind someone who is unemployed, therefore can play all the time. Same thing for the meth reference, as you'll be able to advance faster if you don't have to deal with all that "sleep" nonsense.
I wasn't meaning at all to slander people who devote alot of free time to these games(I've certainly devoted no shortage of time playing, myself), and looking back on what I typed I can see how a person might think that, so again I apologize.
What you are saying is correct, but if you have better things to do why play MMORPGs? Why force them to become something you are able to play because you don't have the time to do it? I think that is the reason MMOs are the way they are right now. Because people wanted them that way and complained a lot. It could be because they played MMOs before and now don't have time or that they feel their time is spent elsewhere. The issue is that there are plenty of great single player and co op games out there to play that fulfill most of the requirements said players ask for. Even mass PvP combat on a level playing field with FPS combat is available in non MMO games. For some reason people want to remove what an MMO is all about for no real good reason IMO.
I'm not sure how to answer your first question. I decide to play MMO's because I feel like playing one, just as I might want to watch TV, go see a movie, go sit in a park, ANYTHING. The thing I want to do most at any given time IS the better thing to do. Do I have to choose between "always" and "never"?
I'm not saying anybody should be forced to do anything, nor am I saying that you couldn't create an infinite level MMO. I even gave examples as to how it has been done in MUDD's in the past and how Eve does it. I didn't even say that nobody should do an infinite level theme park, I just don't think it would work, at least not the way they are designed currently.
-PvP with such a system wouldn't work well, for the same reason that PvP battles with people who are several levels apart don't really work. Sooner or later, alot of the players will get tired of paying 15 bucks a month to be somebody's bitch and quit.
-PVE content is generally designed to work within certain levels. Once you exceed those levels, the game will become exceedingly boring. That is, unless you have level + difficulty like, for example, City of Heroes.
-either way, endgames ARE already set on the principal that the longer you play(abstractly speaking), the more powerful you become. It comes as gear from raiding which has better stats, or special skills granted through reputation grind. It's just that a level 60 player with good gear has a decent chance against somebody decked out in full raid gear in PvP, or might actually feel like they contribute something in PVE co-op.
I always that it was more of a personal preference then a " goal " (which in it's own is a personal preference on its own )
if u just play the game to rush the max lvl, in my opinion you're doing it wrong, reaching max lvl is always the " end(?) " goal, but the road there is how u want it, for me, i like to enjoy, explore, quest, get some good lore, dungeons, crafting and after all that maby reach max lvl, but by then i could already be playing my 4'th character.
but max lvl is always someway of an endgoal imo.
The funny thing though, in my experience, it was the older games that made me feel like I had to rush to the top.
Take SWG, for example. I honestly can't remember how many hours I put in training pistols just outside of Restus, Rori shooting space bunnies to get my skills maxxed.
Yes. Literally Space Bunnies. For hours upon hours. Pew pew pew. Kite kite kite. More doc buffs. Pew pew pew. Kite kite kite.
To me, a good example of bad game design is when players play your game in the least fun way they possibly can because it's the best way to meet their personal goals.
Once NGE hit, and it became increasingly obvious that it would be years before the game stopped being a broken, bugged, shadow of what it once was, I moved on to LotRO. My first character didn't reach 60 for the better part of a year, because I was so very much not in a hurry.
Sometimes, IMO, it's the game that sets the "goal".
That's why i said, most games set goals as " max lvl " but you aren't forced to follow it up and rush to it.
in WOW i had more fun farming and crafting , i already had 4 characters before turning max lvl, same goes for guildwars, tera,TSW,ffx, etc
and yeah, the game usually sets the goal but making your own goal and having fun the way u want to is more fun and longlasting then just follow the game goal and rush
That's why i said, most games set goals as " max lvl " but you aren't forced to follow it up and rush to it.
in WOW i had more fun farming and crafting , i already had 4 characters before turning max lvl, same goes for guildwars, tera,TSW,ffx, etc
and yeah, the game usually sets the goal but making your own goal and having fun the way u want to is more fun and longlasting then just follow the game goal and rush
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar They aren't forcing the games to become something else. The devs are changing the game to attract them. The devs are chasing the customer not the other way around.
It's bitterness.
Imagine you're in a relationship with someone, and they start changing themselves to be more attractive to someone who isn't you. Would you be happy about this?
With a very small number of exceptions getting to max level is nearly a given in mmorpg's. If you have enough time and patience, you will get there. It's not hard (skill wise) nor has it ever really been hard. I've never heard another player say, "I couldn't reach max level because it's too difficult". A lot of players claim the "real" game starts at max level.
So I'm wondering if anyone has ever tried breaking that trend. Instead of giving away experience and levels like they're candy make them earned. Make levels more like a belt system in martial arts. You have to demonstrate ability and knowledge to be able to advance. The majority of players will not get anywhere near the top. Some will not advance at all.
The idea is to change the focus from rushing to max to level to becoming proficient with your class.
I think one of the reasons people love mmorpgs is because we can easily succeed. Unlike in real life where success is usually derived from hard work, in a game I can be a powerful mage (or whatever) destroying all before me. If you took that out, I think you'd lose many players. People like to win and win easily.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar @kaos. I wouldn't be happy however I would not blame the other person. I would blame the person I was in the relationship with.
Don't blame the players for the game changing n. Blame the devs for changing the game and chasing the player
why blame anyone? We are talking about entertainment here. Just move on if MMO is no longer your cup of tea.
Comments
TSW is indeed very gear dependent, which is why I said "sort of". But it still requires a good amount of skill at knowing how to handle a fight. You can't just go from one fight to the next with the same build. For example, fighting the fungus things for the quest "The Wild Hunt" will be disastrous if you run an Affliction (DoT) heavy build. My point being, you can't just slap on the best gear and click away. It requires some though or at least, Googling for an effective build.
Anyway, I don' think there's any game that fits the OPs thoughts and I don't think there ever will be.
Good point. I think the OP was suggesting something more along the lines of levelling as overcoming a level of difficulty, rather than, at worst, levelling like "Make Love, not Warcraft". "no matter what, I'll eventually get that next level, if I have to kill a million lvl1 cows to do it!"
I wonder how a system like that would work. Experience points would be out the door; there would have to be some kind of event that you'd have to succeed at in order to level. Essentially it's a single player concept. You'd have to beat Glass Joe and Piston Hurricane to get to Bald Bull , right?
It's one thing to have difficult end game content as people can work together to overcome (and yes, many people do get carried).
But the question that I always have when someone suggests skill-based gating to fundamental aspects of RPG's (like leveling), I say "Sure, but challenge/difficultly according to whom?"
There's always going to be a cut-off level of difficulty, people talk about how "there would be lots of outcry on forums" but what if YOU were below the cut-off? And I don't mean in a, oh you can just practice and get better and overcome, kind of way. I mean in a, you simply are not capable of playing at a level to advance.
A person likes to think of themselves are greatly capable and of others are woefully incompetent, but the reality is that the skill barrier could in fact be beyond your reach if a system like this was implemented. How long would you try before giving up?
The truth about ideas like these is the sub-text inherent in all of them. "Please make the game just easy enough so that my friends and I can beat the content, but difficult enough to prevent "others" from being able to advance to our level."
I'd love to see a game with legitimately difficult content, and I do mean far above the level at which most people are capable of - just to see how many of the tough guys crumble. I remember when Cataclysm came out and heroics were tuned pretty tightly, finding people capable of completing them was a challenge. It was as if my entire guild suddenly became peace-loving crafters who just wanted to level alts and didn't care about progression anymore. It was really funny. And the forums, oh the forums. All those people blathering on about how they wanted challenge back in the game, they got it and then they cried because the sub-text I mentioned earlier wasn't being met.
"Make it easy enough for me, but make it difficult for others."
This conversation reminds me of various dota2 forums where Invoker gets discussed. Invariably someone calls him the hardest to master and someone calls him easy-mode. He has a built in skill floor that a great number of players just can't overcome. People who can, don't think it's difficult to accomplish. People who can't, consider the hero extremely difficult.
But then you move past the skill floor and look at the skill ceiling. Very few people are capable of playing Invoker at or near the skill ceiling. No other hero demands as much presence of mind to know which spell is best at that given moment, what they will want next, what they still have on cooldown, how the battlefield is changing in real time and how to react to it by changing their next choice, and being able to execute while not dying/being cc'd.
Yet, despite all that. A large number of people who do play him, will continue to call him easy mode because they know a couple of combos and builds. This is WoW syndrome. People who have moved past the skill floor but are unable to either attain or even see how far they themselves are from the skill ceiling. You hear it all the time, "all you need to do is learn your rotation and stay out of the bad." Congrats on moving past the skill floor.
Competitive guilds do the hardest content in gear that the bulk of these "Everything is so easy" players can barely succeed doing LFR in.
In any case, I will continue to have the same question any time this idea is brought up. "Difficult according to whom?"
Difficult or too time consuming?
Skill based games are a little different than progression based.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
I agree. They are a role playing tool in a role playing game.
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
Define? I can give you examples:
- publish a scientific paper
- create a successful product
- write and publish a novel
... and sure .. winning a LoL championship is a real achievement, just like winning the world championship of say ping-pong. But playing some ping-pong with a friend does not count, even if you beat him day in and day out.
Which committee decides what counts?
"If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"
What you are saying is correct, but if you have better things to do why play MMORPGs? Why force them to become something you are able to play because you don't have the time to do it? I think that is the reason MMOs are the way they are right now. Because people wanted them that way and complained a lot. It could be because they played MMOs before and now don't have time or that they feel their time is spent elsewhere. The issue is that there are plenty of great single player and co op games out there to play that fulfill most of the requirements said players ask for. Even mass PvP combat on a level playing field with FPS combat is available in non MMO games. For some reason people want to remove what an MMO is all about for no real good reason IMO.
Mine, of course.
If you think killing a raid boss in a game is an achievement, I will just laugh and be glad that you are not my son. But yes, you do have the prerogative to decide that if doing something in a video game that the devs allow you to do is a "real" achievement.
I have bigger fish to fry.
This ^^^
Some just don't understand.
I am a good example. I wouldn't care less if MMO changes. I like Diablo 3. If MMOs are more like D3, i may give them a look. But if they don't ... i have D3, and many other games to play.
However, it is the devs who seem to want my business .. if so, i am no problem stating my preferences. They can decide if they want to cater to me.
" Rushing to max lvl "
I always that it was more of a personal preference then a " goal " (which in it's own is a personal preference on its own )
if u just play the game to rush the max lvl, in my opinion you're doing it wrong, reaching max lvl is always the " end(?) " goal, but the road there is how u want it, for me, i like to enjoy, explore, quest, get some good lore, dungeons, crafting and after all that maby reach max lvl, but by then i could already be playing my 4'th character.
but max lvl is always someway of an endgoal imo.
Maybe those little number's on the UI should be your toon's age instead of level and your toon died an old cantankerous death when they hit 85. People probably wouldn't rush so quick to get there and you could literally call it the end game.
One can only dream
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I'm not sure how to answer your first question. I decide to play MMO's because I feel like playing one, just as I might want to watch TV, go see a movie, go sit in a park, ANYTHING. The thing I want to do most at any given time IS the better thing to do. Do I have to choose between "always" and "never"?
I'm not saying anybody should be forced to do anything, nor am I saying that you couldn't create an infinite level MMO. I even gave examples as to how it has been done in MUDD's in the past and how Eve does it. I didn't even say that nobody should do an infinite level theme park, I just don't think it would work, at least not the way they are designed currently.
-PvP with such a system wouldn't work well, for the same reason that PvP battles with people who are several levels apart don't really work. Sooner or later, alot of the players will get tired of paying 15 bucks a month to be somebody's bitch and quit.
-PVE content is generally designed to work within certain levels. Once you exceed those levels, the game will become exceedingly boring. That is, unless you have level + difficulty like, for example, City of Heroes.
-either way, endgames ARE already set on the principal that the longer you play(abstractly speaking), the more powerful you become. It comes as gear from raiding which has better stats, or special skills granted through reputation grind. It's just that a level 60 player with good gear has a decent chance against somebody decked out in full raid gear in PvP, or might actually feel like they contribute something in PVE co-op.
The funny thing though, in my experience, it was the older games that made me feel like I had to rush to the top.
Take SWG, for example. I honestly can't remember how many hours I put in training pistols just outside of Restus, Rori shooting space bunnies to get my skills maxxed.
Yes. Literally Space Bunnies. For hours upon hours. Pew pew pew. Kite kite kite. More doc buffs. Pew pew pew. Kite kite kite.
To me, a good example of bad game design is when players play your game in the least fun way they possibly can because it's the best way to meet their personal goals.
Once NGE hit, and it became increasingly obvious that it would be years before the game stopped being a broken, bugged, shadow of what it once was, I moved on to LotRO. My first character didn't reach 60 for the better part of a year, because I was so very much not in a hurry.
Sometimes, IMO, it's the game that sets the "goal".
That's why i said, most games set goals as " max lvl " but you aren't forced to follow it up and rush to it.
in WOW i had more fun farming and crafting , i already had 4 characters before turning max lvl, same goes for guildwars, tera,TSW,ffx, etc
and yeah, the game usually sets the goal but making your own goal and having fun the way u want to is more fun and longlasting then just follow the game goal and rush
Yep, that's pretty much it.
It's bitterness.
Imagine you're in a relationship with someone, and they start changing themselves to be more attractive to someone who isn't you. Would you be happy about this?
I think one of the reasons people love mmorpgs is because we can easily succeed. Unlike in real life where success is usually derived from hard work, in a game I can be a powerful mage (or whatever) destroying all before me. If you took that out, I think you'd lose many players. People like to win and win easily.
Don't blame the players for the game changing n. Blame the devs for changing the game and chasing the player
why blame anyone? We are talking about entertainment here. Just move on if MMO is no longer your cup of tea.
Yes, and those players are playing sandboxes, many which are not linear level based.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
Whether it is bad or not is subjective but three blame is objective.