Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
MMORPG.COM News: Outside the Box: Character Advancement
Dana
Member Posts: 2,415
Nathan's Monday articles return today with a look at Character Advancement in MMORPGs. Each week, Nathan puts forth his comments on the industry in the column we've dubbed "outside the box". Here is a sample from this week's article:
|
Everyone would probably agree that one of the main attractions to the MMORPG genre is the idea of advancing a character through varying degrees of rank, skill, equipment, and accomplishments. People enjoy the fact that most of the tasks they undertake, successful or not, will add at least a minor enhancement to their characters abilities, something lasting that theyll be able to use for the next challenge and/or the next time they log in. On the flip side, the most complained about aspect of MMORPGs is the grind, or the lengthy, tedious, often repetitive processes most games put their players through in order to achieve those goals. So then the topic of this weeks Outside the Box discussion is: How can an MMORPG allow players to advance in various areas, yet somehow not make them feel like theyre grinding? |
You can read the full article here.
Dana Massey
Formerly of MMORPG.com
Currently Lead Designer for Bit Trap Studios
Comments
Damned right!
I'd go in depth about why I agree with this article, but I'm sure some other poster will end up saying the same thing. There are a number of very promising directions where MMOs can be taken, and it's annoying as hell that while promises are plentiful, nobody is actually innovating!
I remember reading about WoW before it came out and about how their advancement and pvp would NOT be a linear increase, and where a few low level players could gang up and take down a high level one. WHY DID THEY SAY THAT?!?
The non-combat focuses are also a really great point. What happened to exploring, creating and learning? All of these activities are either pointless or impossible in today's MMOs. Yes, I know, there's a new crop of "third-generation" MMOs on their way that are supposedly going to tackle these things, but then why do I have this sinking feeling that they're going to take the easy road again? If in a couple years we have nothing more than a whole new crop of shinier, cooler and more stylish grindfests don't say I didn't warn you!
Of course I have high hopes too but... until then, I remain MMO homeless.
So far every article from this guy, mentions EVE as taking the different route.......and yet the questions he asks about why oh why isn't x,y or z implemented.........well, they have been, and generally its in EVE.
I understand the desire for a lot of players to have the cute avatar that they stare at the back of during play. But for those of us who realize that the pilot INSIDE the ship is what counts, EVE is doing most of the innovation now.
Even those who don't like its 'slower' (with quotes) pace, can probably see what its 'ideas' and differences would do even for the ground based mmo's.
All is not cookie cutter out there, and I for one am damn glad that EVE isn't the traditional 'grind'.
I think if players feel like they are making progress without needing to kill endless hordes of the same monsters over and over again then its not grinding.
So first thing - remove the level / cap concept and give us something else to replace it. The problem with levels is that characters expect to get tougher (more hit points, more magic etc) every level, which means tougher monsters are required to provide a challenge, which means there is a big gap between a new player and a veteran.
So I am proposing a skill based system - similar to the old pen and paper runequest game. Use classes to allocate starting skills - like morrowind/oblivion/runequest.
Maybe replace levels with fame / reputation - how well we are known (famous or infamous) based on our deeds and where we are. Then tailor the responses of NPC's, quest givers, merchants based on our fame/rep.
Maybe provide NPC guilds - merchants, smiths, mages etc that hook into our skills and allow us to have different levels of reputation with different groups.
So when we travel to a distant town, or large city they wont have heard of us yet.
Then let players be able to check the fame of other players, even let us influence their rep somewhat so if people rip us off we can give them a bad rep till they go somewhere else.
Then people with really bad reps could become targets for bounty hunting guilds. People with great crafting / merchant reps might become targets for bandits.
Give us political factions and nations to join - enemies and allies.
Give us different quests, or different objectives in the same quests based on our reputation and factions.
I loved the pen & paper runequest skill system where sucessful use of a skill gave a chance to improve it, but the higher the skill the harder it was to increase it. Also you didnt automatically increase you got like three chances per game week to improve.
Give us things to sink our money into - crafting, housing, ships, castles etc so that we can set our own goals, that helps to remove that grind feel.
Dont have such a big variation in equipment. Maybe we need encumberance back so that guy walking round in full plate with a two-handed sword can move as fast, so the guy in leather with a short sword can dodge.
Let everyone have some basic magic (another great thing from p&p runequest).
And give us religions that mean something (like in runequest), where temples provide benefits - training, teaching spells, and they have proscribed spells you cant use. And enemy deities.
Give us political intrigue and in-fighting. Hold elections in factions, and guild and let guild members vote. Give us positions in guilds that mean something - land, income etc.
So if you want to be a mercenary - sure you will be out hunting monsters as someone will pay you to do it. Or fighting in a border skirmish, or a war.
If you want to be a mage - you will be researching, hunting through ruins for lost spells etc. If you dont want to join the mages guild you dont have to.
Let us form our own adventuring companies (guilds) then hire a company to fight a border skirmish (Raids) but reward us with land etc.
Stop the stupid dropping of gold by monsters. Why do bears carry gold anyway?
Make the oppponents drop the stuff they are using - sure it can be damaged and require repair, and some of it will be destroyed.
So my solution
- remove the levels and classes. People can still call them selves a mage if they want to.
- Use skill based so veteran players will be tougher than new players but 5 new players could take down a vet.
- Give us something other than grind to do.
- Give us fame/ reputation as a goal, give us guild membership and political advancement
- remove the XP for killing things or doing quests, give us monetary rewards.
- remove gold drops from monsters (except those that use currency - or horder eg dragons)
- give us meaningful guild and religion membership
- give us bonuses / penalties for our fame
I haven't played EVE and whilst I saw it won many awards in 2005 you only need to look at EVE's subscription numbers to realise there is a much larger market in genre's other than EVE's.
So yes we are talking about getting some of the things EVE does well into other genres. So more people can enjoy playing without all that grind.
And before you tell me maybe people should play EVE, well unfortunately the majority of people aren't into playing an EVE like game.
Back in the 1970's the late David Hargrave produced the rules for his Arduin Ruleset for RPG. One the things he hated about dnd was how higher level characters were like gods compared to low level ones. He created the alternative hit point system with this in mind and it was wonderfull.
At first level fighter would start out with a lot more hit points than the usual dnd first level fighter, but thereafter instead of gaining a lot of HP per level, you would get 1 hp per level of advancement. Thus an 11th level character would have 10 more hit points over a 1st level character.
And dont forget rats - darn those d&d rats are tough
So yes we are talking about getting some of the things EVE does well into other genres. So more people can enjoy playing without all that grind.
And before you tell me maybe people should play EVE, well unfortunately the majority of people aren't into playing an EVE like game.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think CCP (Creators of Eve-online) are way ahead of their times; I believe everyone else is behind the times.
The major problem here if you look at subscription numbers is that people still subscribe and pay for the 'junk' like wow ect. after they've maxed out for lack of something better to do. So long as those numbers hold; major game changes would be suicidal (check out news on Starwars Galaxies, prime example)
Eve-online I have to personally commend; the community is awesome (Don't mistake as carebear or friendly with 'awesome
The levelling system is enjoyable.
The only two major downfalls of the game is loss (You can be ganked within 30 seconds and lose over 100million isk easily in the process (Isk is the Eve Currency; think gold. 100 million would take a 1/2 year old player approx 3+ days to recover) Aside from that the game refuses to cater in any scope to carebears/non conforntational players.
The only way in eve to completely avoid PvP/gank/griefing is to stay in high sec space (safe zones) and never join a corporation (guild). Which semi defeats the purpose of mmorpg'in imo.
The second major downfall of eve is the sci-fi genre.
As much as I do enjoy playing eve; I'm more of a RPG style player myself; or the occasional FPS multiplayer gamer, eve falls into a small niche category in this reguards.
The customer support for Eve-online is bar-none; granted you get the occasional GM ass-hat, for the most part; specifically the DEV's are very open and enjoyable.
However having the GM's play in the same game they moderate leads to some major suspicions.
All and all; Eve-online is exactly what this article is talking about; even if you don't enjoy 'space' games; give it a shot. Be warned however the learning curve on the game is absolutley massive. 2 weeks before you even know how to do anything really, there's alot to learn and can become very overwhelming to start with.
Eve-online offers a free 14 day trial to anyone; with NO-credit card needed.
Just an email address.. download the 500+ meg client and play for 14 days.
I do agree with much of the original posting that was made; however I think it's more that mmo's have become a money game more than an actual content one.
For the most part I see the best mmo's coming out from small(er) before unheard of companies as they are very coordinated and flexable.
Older (and newer) games from Sony or Wizards of the coast for example (cough DnD online cough) are very un-responsive to change, and little short of a mob of angry users at their doors; and nothing gets changed.
To make a short story longer; try eve-online, That's what I wish most of the support and game play was like, my first ingame petition I timed.
Two mintues; thirty seven seconds.
Not 8 days and 1 generic email telling you to post yer DXinfo
-Blitz Hacker-
I agree that EVE is probably the most 'out of the box' type of game out ther atm, but there are flaws in it nonetheless. One of the biggest ones is that it takes place in space, and what is space? Space is a big open area of nothingness with a few stars, planets, and space stations. It is quiet boring to look at, not to mention travel through. It can take upwards of 40+ mins for a newbie player to go from what system to another, and what is there to look at along the way . . nothing absolutely nothing. Sure there are some purty effects and ice/asteroid belts, but most of it is void.
Take eve, put it on a planet (or planets) surface, change ships to actual avatars, and create something to look at while you running around. This would pull more people into playing the game. The reason, imo, that eve's subscription base is so small is the simple fact that its a big vast emptiness that simply is dull and overwhelms the new players.
I played and enjoyed Freelancer so I have considered trying EVE, biggest problem is finding time to play as I have read it has a steep learning curve, and I am currently (and for the past year) spending most of my time playing Guild Wars.
Guild Wars has quite a good take on the non grind, if anything its too easy - halfway through the game you are at maximum level.
But I agree with the previous poster if we could take EVE's skill type system and put it on a planet in a Fantasy or Sci-fi game that would be great. Waiting to see what Tabula Rasa plays like.
Once again inspiration comes from the tried and tested Pencil and Paper RPGs. Again I refer to Shadowrun as my leading inspiration. Being a veteran of both PnP RPGs and MMOs I have seen what works and what is and has been falling short in my opinion. This includes levels, overly structured classes, linear progression and a true end game senario, to which a RPG is not suppose to have. I have always followed the old saying there is no, "winning the game" when it comes to RPGs, it is about the advancement, experience and character development. Kind of like taking on the role of a character in a story epic, gitty, comedic or otherwise, which you are the pupet master in his or her life.
As for game mechanics, I have always seen overemphasizing the importance of equipment as a major hinderance in most games. I think again in a level based game that it puts to much emphasis on characters level, and not enough on the characters achievements and as the developer of Heros Journey has said, mechanically it drives players away from playing genuine unique characters and instead they are driven to build stat mounds. (Stat Mound: a heap of statistics with little to no depth, substance or distinguishing character traits, a toon if you will)
Aside from all of these "features" current gen MMORPGs offer, a Shadowrun brand of MMO, even if just the concepts were adopted it would make for a great MMO. First, there are no levels, it is all skill based. Second, no rigid class system, instead it offers archetypes or soft restrictions on abilities or rather a character may lessen its effectiveness by overextend their resources, ability or essence. Third, the system does not use conventional hit point, which in a level system leads to higher level character slaughtering lower leveled characters and/or higher level characters pummeling each other for days before one of them finally fall. Forth, this one is partially do to not having hit points, but weapons are almost as effective on a newer character as they are on veterans. The equipment of course have grades and better qualities however, the greater the items effect the larger the drawbacks. This works well as a balancing agent, and is a great equalizer that keeps the game competitive throughout the gaming experience. Fifth, its not a strait forward fantasy game, which in my opinion has been beaten into the ground with Everquest clone after Everquest clone.
Well thats my 2 nuyen anyway. Oh and yes there is a new edition of Shadowrun, 4th ed., which is very much more streamlined and has had a complete overhaul. Some interesting new developments include; a wireless matrix and streamlined rules so that Streetsamurais, Riggers, Deckers and Mages exist under the same basic mechanics. Thought you just might want to know.
-Edit-
I forgot to mention a couple other aspects that makes SR a superb model. One being the economy system, in which characters must pay for their life styles, insurance and medical (Doc Wagon contracts). Additionally, Doc Wagon offers a unique way of dealing with death, looting and similar aspects.
Uggh, classic case of mis-identifying the problem, and then proposing a fix that doesnt address the real problem. Nathan, you should consider a career in education. (thats a slam on our education system not you by the way)
The character advancement or develpment process does not creates the grind. Its the adventure process. That is too say, what people abhored was going out and killing 5000 creatures of a certain level to advance. After the 20th or so it got boring. The problem was in fleshing out the world and providing fun and varied ways to gain experience. WOW and other games have made some advancement in this area. The well developed quest system in WOW (even though some of the quests were grind style quests) was a major contributer to its success IMHO.
Its funny you mentioned D&D so much, as DDO (D&D Online) is in fact the dungeons and dragons system, and there is very little grind. The game is full of innovative and challenging quests, with traps and puzzles, and lots of fighting to boot. But fighting towards a goal, and you have to party up to acccomplish these missions, there is no soloing most of them. Some mission areas can only be accessed by a wizard, others by thieves, some by fighters, some by clerics. Its wonderful! Grind, what grind? and this is the very game system you are using as the basis for your supposed problem.
Truth is, the problem always was and always will be content, not the character design system. Certain crafting systems excerbated the problem as well, and I know you know what/who I mean.
Different character design systems whether level based or skill based or other, are desireable IMHO as they provide variety in gaming, but none of them are a solution to a grind based game. The solution to that is excellent and creative content and a well rounded adventure dossier.
Thanks for starting another good thread.
Rigghawk
Rigghawk
I agree that EVE is probably the most 'out of the box' type of game out ther atm, but there are flaws in it nonetheless. One of the biggest ones is that it takes place in space, and what is space? Space is a big open area of nothingness with a few stars, planets, and space stations. It is quiet boring to look at, not to mention travel through. It can take upwards of 40+ mins for a newbie player to go from what system to another, and what is there to look at along the way . . nothing absolutely nothing. Sure there are some purty effects and ice/asteroid belts, but most of it is void.
Take eve, put it on a planet (or planets) surface, change ships to actual avatars, and create something to look at while you running around. This would pull more people into playing the game. The reason, imo, that eve's subscription base is so small is the simple fact that its a big vast emptiness that simply is dull and overwhelms the new players.
My point wasn't ABOUT EVE itself, it was about what EVE's "ruleset" if you will, is doing. I made specific mention that its not a game for everyone.
----I will comment, that if all you got was vast emptyness, then you really didn't get involved with the players/corporations, etc, BUT.......that's beside the point I was trying to make.--------
The point, specifically is that the original article basically mentioned EVE as a throwaway, and then goes on to detail the numerous shortcomings and problems with skill based (by and large) mmo's.
My point was that a LOT of what EVE has implemented resolves those problems IRREGARDLESS of what genre' EVE actually is.
Take EVE's sandbox, and apply to WOW, or EQ, or hell even SWG. Take the LEVEL grind out of the game, and you now have a more 'social' environment where the group CAN participate together regardless of "skill". Where the dungeon can be done with varying skills rather than "for this LEVEL only". What EVE has done with this is tossed the "endgame" out on its ear. It allows a group to have challenges for as long as they choose to, rather than a simple game mechanic doing it for them.
What EVE has done, especially in the realm of social order, is allow a MIX, not only of "level" but of type. Its security zones, time based training methods, and its very hands off-"create your own reality-make your own way approach" allow for the casual builder to build and still interact to a higher degree with the hardcore pvp merc. To allow the three week old wet behind the ears pilot particpate in AND be an effective element alongside the battlehardened veteran in a fleet action or fight.
The focus being forced away from the typical skill grind lets the players focus more on the social aspects of the universe. Some prefer the solo route, but EVE's strengths lie in its fantastic ability to let the groups make their fortune, lay their claims, defend them and prosper OR DIE by their OWN actions.
Sure the new player can't do things the old timer can, but he CAN be an effective member of the community (corp/guild/whathaveyou) without the grind.
Now there will be the "but getting money is a grind", and yes, yes it is, but that particular "grind" puts VALUE upon the ships/equipment/modules/blueprints, etc. Without a value assigned, an MMO becomes another fps shooter with no real consequence.
The other thing that EVE has done, is allows the "carebear" to co-exist in the SAME WORLD as the PVP'er. Its security zones aren't 100% safe, but they guarantee a range of spaces where everyone can live in the same "server environment" without the issues a lot of PVP vs. PVE worlds run into when trying to mix the two.
To conclude, my points here, while using EVE as the example also show solutions to issues brought up by the article, REGARDLESS OF the genre'/niche' that EVE occupies.
It is bringing new and fresh ideas as to what an MMO "world" could and should be like to live in.
Let's give the real-deal Eve low down since it's been brought up, continues to be brought up, will continue to be brought and seems to one of the main yard sticks by which everything else is measured against...
Strengths of Eve - player economy. While there are still some things that surely should be ironed out, Eve has a fantastic player economy. Everything in the game can be bought and sold and almost everything can be built and sold. This makes for a wildly diverse and fantastic economic system. But, as mentioned at the start, it's not perfect, but pretty sweet and almost unlike anything you've seen before for many.
- player communication system. It is, quite simply, astonishing. About the only thing that would make it perfect is built in voice comms. Still, pretty much every MMO I've played since, pales in comparison.
- skill tree/level - there has yet to be a determined max level for characters in Eve. Every year, all sorts of new skills get added in. Some to do new things, some just to make up for changes in development ideology sadly. (*note* see same topic listed in weaknesses)
Weaknesses of Eve -development pace - the development pace of Eve can be best described this way, small creatures that were once swimming around are now walking around upright since the devs started working on something. While a slight and sarcastic exaggeration, development is quite slow and is generally measured in years. Having a small dev team means a kind of social interaction you normally don't find in games today, it also means that large issues or large development ideas for the game take a seeming eternity to get fixed/implimented.
- patching - It's still mind boggling to me, the idea to add massive patches to the game that bring with it massive patch problems, time after time after time. You usually find a few smaller patches to the game here and there but the bread and butter for Eve since the beginning has been the monster once a year upgrade to the game. This also means what you see at monster patch time, is what's on tap for this year for the game. With the short attention spans of everyone though, what is new and glittery at the beginning of the year, is quickly gotten and become boring a few months later, never mind that nasty bug that was introduced in the last upgrade that, for some game issues, has taken literally years to squash out of the game.
- the learning curve - There is just so much to the game, it is, very simply put, overwhelming. This is a big game which means there is a lot for a new player to learn. There are several friendly and helpful community members that will gladly lend a hand though on the plus side. But be warned, this game has just a TON of stuff to learn, and then you might actually be able leave your starter system before having to learn the next ton of stuff about the game.
- the skill tree/level - there is no max level in Eve for characters. While some may appreciate this, in reality, older characters that are cared for and kept training, will always be ahead of newer players for as long as new skills keep getting added to the game. Even if the developers stopped adding new skills to the game, it would still take a new player literally years to catch up to an equal level with older characters. The other problem is that Eve has gone from realitive simplicity to a complex monolith of a game by continually adding new skills/adding skills that make up for development redesigns. I've joked many times, that CCP has all along secretly plotted to create the most complex game ever developed.
The good but at the same time bad of Eve - the PvP - It is a really interesting way that CCP has approached the whole aspect of PvP in their game, to say the least. I'd have to say that from a character stand point, it's somewhat unique and also enjoyable. You can skill up your character and load on all sorts of gizmos and gadgets. Some are just plain dumb set ups, some are wickedly effective. Sadly, here's the bad part. It's all going to be over in about 60 seconds or less. When faced with a modestly skilled group of opponents, if you have the tactics down, you're individual PvP combat experience can last all of 30 seconds. While group combat can drag on for a hours between skilled and seasoned groups of players, when you factor in the cost of some of your ships and what's strapped on them (never mind your in-game toon), it's pretty anti-climatic to have that all vaporized in a blink of an eye. The game also only supports a "you can fight anywhere for xyz cost" war system. While this is pretty interesting and can make no area in the playing gameworld safe, there is no game mechanic to declare a winner, victor or draw. It all boils down to a he said/she said we won scenario, providing you can keep footing the weekly cost of your war that is. Also, there are just some set ups and ways to play the game that make you 99% un-killable while at the same time, being lethally combat ready.
- skill training - all your skills are learned through real time training. Check your little character sheet, select to train a skill, and away it goes. No beating on endless mobs required to learn this or that. As you learn more skills, even more skills open up to be learned. Unless you have a good idea about character development, this also be extremely confusing. There are so many skills and if you don't take the time to educate yourself, you could gimp your toon or worse, waste training time on pretty trivial or even meaningless skills. The downside to real time skill training, as mentioned, a new player will never be able to catch a well looked after older character in total skill points unless there is a complete freeze in new skill additions to the game for at least a couple years. The differences from an older character and a newer character can be that vast. Back on the bonus side though, the way the skill system is set up, a newer character can still have a role, even with a bunch of crusty oldies.
- a one shard world - it's pretty interesting to play an MMO with everyone on one server and in a single perpetual game world. No need to figure out 'well, if he/she was on our server, it'd be a different server'. Think you got it? Well bring it! The downside, due to present technological limitations in internet communication and data processing, the most you could ever hope to get together in a mostly lag free group event is maybe a hundred players in a single part of the game world. So while it's impressive to be online with 20,000 other players all at the same time, what's really the point if only a hundred or so can engage in combat together? It pretty much almost defeats the purpose. On the plus side, with so many players playing together, it has spawned a very tight nit community and has also aided in creating a player driven economy that is second to none in the MMO genre.
- a big honkin game world - It's no lie, there really is 5,000 different star systems in the game. It could take you the better part of a week or two and probably cost you a few lives to see it all, but it's out there baby. A lot of the game world is underdeveloped though and due to dev decisions on various resources allocation, unless there are major content changes, swaths of the game world will most likely never be developed and been empty space. Also, with the addition of so many new players, the game world has seemingly shrunk.
- to boldly go out to no-man's-land and plant your own flag - Eve boasts what is called 0.0 space. This is lawless regions of space where the players make the rules and you can suffer the ultimate consequences for your actions. While this sounds really cool, there are some stark realities to face about Eve. Due to the way the game currently sits, there continues to be a complete lack of true player claiming, ownership and development of this space. While you can create an alliance, claim a chunk of space via self declaration, fight a war over the real estate, develop various space stations and maybe even have a blip on the map attributed to your alliance's namesake, there is no siege or territory control system in the game. The costs of set up, never mind continued operation, in both material and man hours to maintain space are steep. Unless you are highly organized, highly skilled and also a bit lucky, moderately skilled, motivated and equipped invaders are free to roam around your space and wreak havoc among what is supposed to be your stars. No layers of defense to breach, just good timing, a bit of luck and a half decent knowledge of ship equipping and good luck ridding yourself of an invading force. Attacking forces continue to have a strategic upper hand versus those who chose to claim and defend 'their' space. A proper ownership and game mechanics supported siege system would bring Eve to a whole new level though. The devs have intimated at which way they envisage the game continuing to develop, but as I mentioned in the weaknesses, that could literally take years to see happen, if it ever even materializes.
- the grind - while there is no character development tread mill to run through, let's not gloss over reality with pipe dreams. There is a daily economic grind to the game for your average player and no, it isn't very exciting either.
I played Eve religiously for over a year starting shortly after launch. Took a bit of a break and dove back in for about another 6 months and then part time for a few months after that. In the end, I just couldn't stomach the slow development pace, the constant screwing with PvP mechanics instead of just mainlining and focusing on adding to the game in order to improve it and the fact that on the face, the game simply has not changed in a long time. All the ships are virtually the same looking. All the stations, player, npc and conquerable are all the same looking. All the space is the same looking. Play the game long enough and you'll experience pretty much all aspects of the game. Add all this together and this gamer grew, well, bored and left for something else. In the time since I left though, the game has seen enormous growth population wise. If you haven't had much experience with MMO's you've probably not played anything like it. A veteran MMO player will recognize common elements with a new twist. Definitely not a game for everyone. Is it the pinnacle MMO? I sure hope not. As I saw mentioned before, if this is the award winning best right now, while Eve deserves some praise, it sure shows an overall weak MMO genre right now. It's a solid game but just like anything else, it's got it's flaws and there are quite a few.
Just thought it should get a fare shake instead of the constant ooh's and aaa's and bashing it gets on this site.
About the article. Not so outside the box as the others have been so far, considering the conversation that the last installment sparked.
An observation too, maybe an outside the box idea for outside the box. stop writing comparison articles. Maybe dream up something completely out of the box. Sure, a little reference for starting the converstation, but a few straight articles have been soley based on comparisons to other titles and between titles as the basis for the article. Maybe a few out of the box ideas for games? Just a thought.
There seems to be a basic flaw in the argument that players don't like grinding so games need to find alternative methods of advancement; players actually seem to flock to games with a grind-based model and stay there for months or even years.
Lots of articualate, voluble players, who like to post on boards, don't seem to like grinding. How representative they are of the mass of sub-paying, hour-playing online gamers, however, I rather doubt.
I can take or leave a bit of grinding, myself. Whether repeatedly killing the same creatures for hours is entertaining or not tends to depend on both the process and the outcome. I have always compared it to real-life continual actions such as knitting or whittling. People who knit or whittle often do so to have something to do with their hands while they use their brains for something else. That's how I tend to play MMOs in grind mode, generally listening to comedy or drama on digital radio while playing.
The process has to be pleasant and relaxing, which it is in games with a good UI and predictable, consistent spawns. It's very well documented that players in MMOs tend to gravitate to the most predictable hunting areas that offer the least variation of action and provide the steadiest incremental return for the minimum effort. It takes considerable carrots in the way of much better loot opportunities or big xp bonuses to lure them into more dangerous, unpredictable areas, and often they just won't be lured unless all the simple, repetetive options are removed.
I think that the majority of players interested in any form of linear advancement at all will always gravitate towards the least challenging means of progressing that advancement, and that games which are designed to try and make this difficult are likely to remain niche products.
This post you've made here is a 'review' by a former player of a game. This, to me, is derailing the thread. I did NOT post about EVE as a review, but rather as some 'answers' to some of the questions posed by the article.
I will comment to one piece of the review however and it is this:
[quote]Originally posted by justAgamer
The skill tree/level - there is no max level in Eve for characters. While some may appreciate this, in reality, older characters that are cared for and kept training, will always be ahead of newer players for as long as new skills keep getting added to the game.
[/b][/quote]
This is the MOST REPEATED BIT of NONSENSE that keeps getting whined about on these boards.
I'll NOT repost the thread, rather link it which shows in point of fact that this is NOT true. Why isn't it true? People LEAVE THE GAME. The median average of experience points in eve is around the 5-10 million skill point mark. This 'never catch up' is a lame argument to bolster powergamer's desires to keep out those who cannot keep up because they have other commitments to fulfill in real life.
It keeps getting repeated until even those in EVE parrot it, and its enough to drive a person crazy.
EVE's skill time based training has been set up specifically with diminishing returns to AVOID this, which is yet another example of how this MMO attempts to change the "norm" of the traditional grind till you drop to get the next 'level' game.
Here is the link for those interested in what the ACTUAL numbers regarding skills are given out by the lead developer of CCP: (the text is 5th post from the top of the first page of the thread)
Skill points information
Link to the article with Oveur (Nathan Richardsson) of CCP:
Linkage
Yet again another great column from Nathan that I find myself in agreement with. Indeed that out-the-gate curve looks so familiar I'm begining to suspect I'm being spied upon
My mistake my curve is a lot flatter and has a few other unusual features that I can't go into for obvious reasons. However its a bit more difficult to measure a character's overall ability since I'm taking my cue more from RQ (that's RuneQuest for you non-PnP folks) than from any other. Well to be honest its more inspired by CoC and UA, but I've said too much.
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference."
-- The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost
I agree to rigghawk.
My question is this way do I have to kill 2000 lvl something to advans my skill or lvl as you said it gets boring after 20 ore so. Whay not make it more queste or epik deed kill 1 or 2 realy hard mobs that take the same time as killing lots of smaller mobs but requiers mor skill and strategy. This ofcorse demands that as Nathan said there is less of a diferens betvin vetts and noods. a smaller difrens whold allso leed to the bosebillity to form an adveture groupe whith say 5 vets and 10 noods and being efektiv.
Allso lett this epik mobs stay dead so you have to explore to find new ones. that whold ofcorse forse the GM:s to be more creativ an constantly develop new content eaven in old areas.
Way cant an army of pesents kill the dragon ass vell as the knight in shining armor.
Good questions and points. (Despite you spelling
)
I'm for a skill based system because it tells me that the game is being built around freedoms, not restrictions, and around more realism as opposed to unrealistic restrictions.
Yet, there are some possitives from a class based game. The good things they offer can easily be implemented into a skill based game, and should be to make it better. But the foundation still needs to be skill based.
Once upon a time....
Something that has been striking a chored with me lately, is the number of people that seem to think levels are not a problem. Back in the day, I would more than likely have agreed wholeheartedly, nowadays, I have come to see the inherent problems associated with them. One being zoning, in that characters are limited in their ability to explore and it hinders the adventurous atmosphere of a game. In addition, it also lessens the games replay-ability by making quests or missions recieved in the past unplayable due to them no longer being challenging and/or they yield minuscule rewards because of the level at which they were recieved. This coupled with the fact that a character system using levels is intrisically unbalanced, for in a typical level model a character advances at an expediential rate making it virtually impossible for lower level characters to truely put up a good fight against one of a higher level.
Again just my 2 nuyen.
-Betrachten Sie diesen zweiköpfigen Muskel und pectorals. Haben Sie überhaupt gesehen einem vollkommeneren Probestück, haben Sie kümmerlicher Mann?!!!
I am on lunch break so sorry if someone already posted this idea.
My main objection to all mmorpg games (which I still love and played just about everyone at sometime) is the removal of some basic rpg concepts. By this I mean ice spells hurt fire creatures, fire armor reduces attacks from ice spells, etc...
If a mmorpg really got down to the mechanics of older rpg games like Final Fantasy type games they could introduce multiply waves of class systems. Though complicated to program, it would be the ULTIMATE game.
For Example. A warrior that progresses can learn to use crude ice spells, while a newbie wizard that follows along the line of Ice spells would be stronger in the ice spell so the warrior at upper lvls still needs lower lvl spells on some bosses and has to be a tank for the wizard to survive.
If you can mix and match but still have stronger solid classes the whole community would have to band together to fight. It would be EXTREMELY hard to figure out the math and formula for everything that would be involved in this, but then again you still have a diversity that would break the lvl barriers but still have the hardcore gamers/grinders moving further ahead.
First of all, I don't accept the assumption (and that's all it is so far) that players only like character advancement games. Maybe it is true, but how do we know? Where are the alternative games that would give us some evidence as to whether this assumption is correct or not?
In fact, I think there are reasons to believe that character advancement games have some innate flaws, and thus that alternatives could prove to be fun, too.
Designing a game to have character advancement automatically means that players spend the first part of their in-game lives levelling up just so they can get to the end game which, theoretically, is where the real fun of a game is. Instead of playing the fun part of the game, players spend weeks or months training to get to the fun. Instead of implementing the fun content, developers spend weeks and months implementing character advancement content that players feel they have to grind through.
Why do we accept this state of affairs as "what players really want?"
Here's a concept I've been working on. Let players choose from among a large number of skills when they create their character... and that's it. When you're done creating your character, you're ready to play the game. No levelling, no grinding, no "low-level" content -- it's all end game from the moment you exit character creation.
This does not imply that "everyone can do everything." Because there are skills, because different skills favor different gameplay styles and thus appeal to different kinds of players, and because not everyone will choose the same skills, some characters will be better than others at performing certain tasks. A character with a lot of combat skills won't be as good at building houses as a character with crafting skills; a crafter won't be as good at making money as a character who learned financial skills; and so on.
Furthermore, content doesn't have to be graded by level. It can also vary according to how hard it is to reach through travel, or by how many players (and how many unique skills) are typically needed to complete that content. Again, a game without character advancement does not imply that every character can take on all content. It just means you don't have to spend time trying to open up the content that's already been designed for you.
Not having skill-based character advancement also doesn't mean it's impossible to improve a character over time. For combat players, there are all kinds of rewards that don't vastly increase the power of veteran players over new players: perks like rank, badges, leader boards. For the other type of competitive player -- economic players -- there's the other big form of improvement: money. Even if there aren't crazy things to buy, players will still collect money as a form of keeping score.
Finally, it's possible to have skill advancement even in a non-advancement game... but the only way to make this work is if each improvement comes with additional responsibility for helping other players have fun. When the rewards for collecting XP are nothing but more power (as in current character advancement games), everybody goes for advancement. When a reward is all benefit and no cost, everyone will try to take that benefit. Why not? Except that this leads to a game full of cookie-cutter characters.
Instead, I believe every reward should come with strings attached. In particular, advancing in some level such as rank should impose new and larger responsibilities. This means treating tactical gameplay as distinct from operational gameplay, and operational gameplay as different from strategic gameplay. Each higher level should require more abstract thinking and more time spent coordinating the gameplay of other players instead of just being concerned with one's own immediate gratification.
This requires one additional feature: players must be free to choose not to advance. If you like pedal-to-the-metal, full-tilt-boogie combat action, there's no reason why a game should force you to stop playing at that tactical level game just because you "have to" advance in level. If you're willing to take on the logistical and long-range planning headaches that go with strategic-level gameplay, then you're free to advance to seek those challenges, but if you like being a sergeant, you ought to be able to stay a sergeant.
In summary, yes, character advancement is a familiar model, and players do like to feel that their characters are becoming more powerful. But character advancement also imposes some effects that aren't much fun, like having to spend weeks grinding to level up before you can start enjoying the deepest content. On balance, I believe a game that lets you create a complete character has at least an equal chance of success as character advancement games, and I look forward to some enterprising developer giving this idea a shot.
--Flatfingers
A classless skillbased MMORPG is the route that I would like to see.
Attributes and skills would be payed for with experience. Experience would be earned by performing activities. You should only be able to spend experience on skills and attributes you use.
By allowing this kind of freeform character creation the player's feel they have more control over their characters. This also allows for a more unique and personal play experience because players truly have more choice in how they play thier characters. Classes limit oppurtunity and ultimate lead to cookie cutter builds.
As far as everything leading to or supporting combat that is true. Other activities need to be put into games in a method that has nothing to do with combat. Most crafters have to do some sort of combat at low levels just to be able to acquire minimum supplies for initial crafting. A fix to this might be some sort of investment/tax where players could work for an NPC/Veteran player that supplies them with materials and inturn recieves a share of the profits from the players sales. This would have to be done in an ingame system to keep everyone honest.
Hmmm... Actually the graph he uses is only half completed.
You cannot just compare "Flat" versus "out the gate" Because this will not give a newbie a competitive edge. All you are doing as it looks on the chart and in your explanation is slowing down the growth of the character, but there is no advantage that a newbie will have to even out the playing field.
The only way to have a competitive field balanced out between newcomers and veterans. Is a simple problem with a simple solution. It stems from the most basic and natural example of that is . Youth's physical prowess must be pitted against a veterans experience.
Your avatar should be able to rapidly be able to increase their stats and skillbase (be able to learn alot of skills) with a general progression that peaks off at a certain level of experience.
Here is where it gets interesting. As you start to notice that your stats and skills experience are not growing as quickly as it did a couple of days ago you can start to tweak your character by focusing on only as set amount of skills. You maybe can be given the option to go to a training school that will show you how " to apply those knitting skills you learned initially to make some clothes for yourself into kicking" ending in reducing the amount of experience that was originally put into knitting and transfering them into kicking. Same with stats. Even to the point of being able to drop skills complete if you wish So you can train on something else that compliments your kick.
In the end what you end up is with a pool of players who are fairly new but with a plethora of high stats and a plethora of low skills experience, A middle ground where you still some of those healthy stats but you also start to hone in on key skills and dropping those you wont need, and at the end game veteran players who have mastered key combinations of skills that make them deadly in the battlefield (or the knitting hall which ever is your preference) they may not have the huge stats they did originally. But where strength has dwindle experience makes up for it very nicely.
In a game situation this would go as so:
You have a 1 month player and a six month player dueling
stats: 1 month vs 6 months
strength: 80 70
skill kick: 25% 50%
The 1 month player can do 10% more damage then the 6 month player if their kick lands
but the 6 month player can land their kick 25% more times then the 1 month. In the end the veteran still has an extremely strong advantage over the newcomer being able to land more blows then the new comer with just a 10% difference in damage. The newcomer will need a lot of very serious luck to pull a win out of this. But if 2 newcomers take on this veteran it becomes quite an interesting challenge for the veteran and ends up being now a more even match of brute vs skill.
This is how you balance end game players with your new comers.
In comparison a 3 month player stat would be as follow:
strength: 75
kick: 37%
Faranthil Tanathalos
EverQuest 1 - Ranger
Star Wars Galaxies - Master Ranger
Everquest2 - Ranger WarhammerOnline - Shadow Warrior
WOW - Hunter
That's right I like bows and arrows.