It's because the journey sucks in MMORPG. Thats why its been shortened. Mob grinding and menial task are just crappy vessels to feed us progression. Its a rabbit pressing the button to get a treat worthy. And its the majority of the content available. End game is a small section that you spend majority of your time in even worst repetituous small content.
The activities you do generally aren't not enjoyable while leveling. They are tolerable at best. You would not play a game that you had to do those task and grinds if you didn't level. Single player RPGS the story and game play have to have merit on their own. MMORPG leveling is why you play and content is just the means to do it.
I've explained multiple times that "short"* leveling in modern games is designed to aid in having a large pool of teammates for the group-intensive gameplay that exists at endgame. (*insofar as 7-15 days worth of playtime can be considered "short")
Similarly I've explained multiple times how endgame will naturally be more repetitive, as developers lose the most players early on after a new player installs the game (in mobile games you often literally lose around half the players on day #2. That's a gigantic number!) Naturally this results in a smart developer spending inverse effort relative to the player loss: if you lose most of your players on the first day, the first week, and the first month, then obviously you should optimize your content around that problem so that you give players enough fun that lots of them are still playing by endgame a few months into the game's release.
When a professional game designer comes in and tells you facts about game design, what possible benefit do you gain by choosing ignorance over knowledge? Is your false world view about gaming really that precious to you that you don't even care that it's dead wrong?
Oh no the professional lol. You still haven't explained why have the pretext of short progression. Why not jump right into an end game state if that's what your selling? B
eing a developer you should understand and know there are other philosophies. Other developers have different view points and some share mine. I didn't invent the view point.
Oh no the professional lol. You still haven't explained why have the pretext of short progression. Why not jump right into an end game state if that's what your selling? B
eing a developer you should understand and know there are other philosophies. Other developers have different view points and some share mine. I didn't invent the view point.
I've explained all of this to you before. Singleplayer content is provided as a tutorial, and because it's what players want, and it tends to be higher quality content to optimize for early player retention (the period where the most players will abandon a game if they aren't having fun,) and then it's (relatively) short so that those players then end up in the endgame player pool for group-based activities.
Other philosophies doesn't mean those philosophies are wise ones. Several asian companies are producing grind-fest MMORPGs -- how well is that philosophy of shallow repetition working out for their western appeal?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
When a professional game designer comes in and tells you facts about game design, what possible benefit do you gain by choosing ignorance over knowledge? Is your false world view about gaming really that precious to you that you don't even care that it's dead wrong?
Well for one you seem to have misunderstood that "opinion" and "fact" do not mean the same thing.
Two, you've actually consistently failed to address his question. Your explanation at best only says that the games are designed as they are because "endgame" as it is designed demands it.
It fails to explain the reason to design endgame in that manner in the first place, or have a design that pushes "endgame" as the primary trend at all.
You are also not the only developer here or in the world, so acting like your opinions on development is the gospel is utterly fallacious.
"Short" levels and a push to drop people into the far-end of the game's content and shifting the focus of the content so distinctly does not explain the attainment of "enough fun that lots of them are still playing". All you offered there is a narrow window of design options for games that doesn't even ascribe any content or features that would make the experience remotely "fun". It also fails to relate to level pacing or mechanics.
As such, you basically just spent your time dodging the problem asserted that the "journey" in the game is simply not great or deep.
You even contradict yourself by first asserting that the game design is focused on delivering players to the endgame content, but then you say that the early content is what needs the greatest focus/optimization for player retention. One or the other there, buddy.
"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
Oh no the professional lol. You still haven't explained why have the pretext of short progression. Why not jump right into an end game state if that's what your selling? B
eing a developer you should understand and know there are other philosophies. Other developers have different view points and some share mine. I didn't invent the view point.
I've explained all of this to you before. Singleplayer content is provided as a tutorial, and because it's what players want, and it tends to be higher quality content to optimize for early player retention (the period where the most players will abandon a game if they aren't having fun,) and then it's (relatively) short so that those players then end up in the endgame player pool for group-based activities.
Other philosophies doesn't mean those philosophies are wise ones. Several asian companies are producing grind-fest MMORPGs -- how well is that philosophy of shallow repetition working out for their western appeal?
1. If that's the case they are very poor mechanics as a tutorial. Most players don't know how to properly play their classes because of the speed and lack of challenge in the content. Most players learn how to play by Youtube and imitate parsed rotations.
2. You still are ignoring your own irony. You are saying that MOB grind(which is also criticize) are grinds. Yet gear grinds of the end game are anything but repetitious grinds in a small area of the world. (Other post)You never addressed how revisiting the whole world is more repetitious than revisiting a few raids and daily in a few instances. You never address why you have to have "endgame" instead of "whole game" being the activity.
3. You use your opinion as fact. You're trying to argue me as endorsing grind when I am against MOB grinds and forced filler task.
My support of lack of levels comes from desire not to do mindless things like MOB grinding and filler task just to say I have content. Those actions are not fun but are required to reach a goal in MMORPG. People do it because they're rewarded. Its mediocre content that nobody would do if it wasn't required to level. I prefer not to focus the whole game on leveling like it is now.
If this is such a great system then why is nobody else creating it anymore? Why are most MMORPG losing players despite them not even paying for it?
I'm wondering... Why haven't people mentioned Chronicles of Elyria in this chat yet? Yes, I know the game is still in pre-alpha, but it's trying to break all the moulds that I have seen mentioned here. No (classical) levels, no classes, no typical hp bar (though there is one, sort of).
I'm just saying, for those who want to move away from this old system, support CoE and redefine the genre
1. If that's the case they are very poor mechanics as a tutorial. Most players don't know how to properly play their classes because of the speed and lack of challenge in the content. Most players learn how to play by Youtube and imitate parsed rotations.
2. You still are ignoring your own irony. You are saying that MOB grind(which is also criticize) are grinds. Yet gear grinds of the end game are anything but repetitious grinds in a small area of the world. (Other post)You never addressed how revisiting the whole world is more repetitious than revisiting a few raids and daily in a few instances. You never address why you have to have "endgame" instead of "whole game" being the activity.
3. You use your opinion as fact. You're trying to argue me as endorsing grind when I am against MOB grinds and forced filler task.
My support of lack of levels comes from desire not to do mindless things like MOB grinding and filler task just to say I have content. Those actions are not fun but are required to reach a goal in MMORPG. People do it because they're rewarded. Its mediocre content that nobody would do if it wasn't required to level. I prefer not to focus the whole game on leveling like it is now.
If this is such a great system then why is nobody else creating it anymore? Why are most MMORPG losing players despite them not even paying for it?
1. So you believe players would be exactly as skilled if they jumped straight into group play as they are with a lengthy period of solo play learning their class? Why imply you believe something so obviously wrong? Are you putting any thought into your posts at all?
2. This is strangely off-topic, why are you bringing it up? Also it's strangely devoid of reason. (A) Obviously it's better for the early part of a game to be less grindy. (B) Obviously in a long-form PVE game with finite dev-produced content, late-game will end up being grindier than early game. Grind is never desirable, but there's no way to magically avoid all grind because games are inevitably going to be repetitive at some point. There's nothing ironic to this, and the conversation in the other thread still holds true that quests are dramatically less grindy than grind-based games.
3. Would you like to quote something specific that you believe is opinion? It seems unlikely you'll be able to, which is why you've stuck to a very vague criticism here.
4. You're not going to get away from Grinding or Questing. Any rewarded activity in a game will either be freeform or formalized. If it's formalized, it's a quest (even if it's called a "mission" or some other name.) If it's freeform, it'll be considered more grindy because it'll allow players to pursue excessive repetition. But this is all off-topic because levels are the reward, they're not how you get the reward. A grind is still a grind even if you're grinding for skill points or items or any other reward. Removing levels doesn't change a thing.
5. Are you suggesting you believe nobody is creating level-based games anymore? Why would you suggest something so obviously wrong? Surely you have the internet and the ability to see that all sorts of games still use levels. MMORPGs stagnating as a genre isn't in any way related to their having levels.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I'm wondering... Why haven't people mentioned Chronicles of Elyria in this chat yet? Yes, I know the game is still in pre-alpha, but it's trying to break all the moulds that I have seen mentioned here. No (classical) levels, no classes, no typical hp bar (though there is one, sort of).
I'm just saying, for those who want to move away from this old system, support CoE and redefine the genre
There's a variety of games that seek to change game play. Mainly we have to wait and see as they get closer towards release. Age and dying doesn't help in this game's case. I myself would find that interesting except for the short time period before old age death.
This topic's points aren't the only ones involved in releasing a "good game". There are other issues. Cash Shops, PvP, locked this and that, world (or lack thereof), lots and lots of issues to consider.
First of all, everyone knows that players rush through levels in the current MMO's. The faster the better.
As long as games are made with this design, where you level and level and level to get to "End Game" and collect your "reward" along the way, then players will be on a race to get there. That's human nature. It's hardwired in our brains to be efficient and fast for more "reward".
So as long as games have this tiered level design, and "reward" based on said levels (based on the big power gaps), players will rush through it, no matter what they really want for game play. And the worst part is that the "journey" players will never be able to go back for said "journey" because they've rushed right past the rewards based on those power gaps. (Well, they can, they just don't get reward or good game play from vastly under-powered content.)
Nonsense.
Players are going to improve their situation rapidly. This isn't a "current MMO" thing. It's been true of gaming since the start.
It's not a product of game design, but a fundamental human instinct to try to improve our position in life.
It doesn't matter what form the improvement takes: getting a nice house in UO, reaching max level, or getting the best sword are all the same thing.
Level just happens to be clearest and simplest form of progression, so it's used a lot more.
It doesn't benefit you to have a selective memory and conveniently forget that players tried to work towards having a nice house in UO as fast as possible, or leveling in EQ as fast as possible, or countless other ways that early MMORPGs let players improve their characters. Choosing to deliberately ignore the past doesn't aid you. So why do it?
I agree with everything you said there except the very first comment, "nonsense".
You just proved that what I said was accurate with this post.
It doesn't matter what form the improvement takes: getting a nice house in UO, reaching max level, or getting the best sword are all the same thing.
Housing is not leveling. -Players spent lots of time designing their houses and decorating them, -held guild meetings, -ran player auctions, -sold their crafts and loot on their vendors, -went around looking for deals from other players houses, -held tournaments of combat- chess- even story telling, -turned their houses into player run taverns, -ran player run events, -held feasts and parties where players could eat and drink from the items on the tables -made libraries -made teleport stations -stored bulk quantities of resources -set up crafting stations -ran town halls -etc., etc., etc.
UO was a Sandbox. A Sandbox that needed to fulfill it's dream and was beset by rampant PKing and stealing. But a different game from the standard where all you do is run level to level through pre-designed and zoned content restricted by level.
In UO players said: "Don't worry about 'dings', just play the game and the skills come just as fast, and it's more fun."
Axehilt said: Would you like to quote something specific that you believe is opinion?
"endgame will naturally be more repetitive" "Other philosophies doesn't mean those philosophies are wise ones." "You're not going to get away from Grinding or Questing." "If it's formalized, it's a quest" "at endgame in a MMORPG there's still a lot left to do" "In an RTS game you're making a nonstop series of decisions in real-time." "travel isn't offering additional gameplay" "RPGs are about narrative, progression, and stats-based combat." "What I'm describing is rooted in how players enjoy games." "Enough sucking happens in players' normal lives..." "My ignoring the rest of the argument is irrelevant, because all I've cited is a simple undeniable fact."
There's tons more, but citing entire posts just wouldn't fit.
EDIT: @Amaranthar Yeah that one confused me when he disagreed and them immediately supported your argument.
"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
I agree with everything you said there except the very first comment, "nonsense".
You just proved that what I said was accurate with this post.
Housing is not leveling. -Players spent lots of time designing their houses and decorating them, -held guild meetings, -ran player auctions, -sold their crafts and loot on their vendors, -went around looking for deals from other players houses, -held tournaments of combat- chess- even story telling, -turned their houses into player run taverns, -ran player run events, -held feasts and parties where players could eat and drink from the items on the tables -made libraries -made teleport stations -stored bulk quantities of resources -set up crafting stations -ran town halls -etc., etc., etc.
UO was a Sandbox. A Sandbox that needed to fulfill it's dream and was beset by rampant PKing and stealing. But a different game from the standard where all you do is run level to level through pre-designed and zoned content restricted by level.
In UO players said: "Don't worry about 'dings', just play the game and the skills come just as fast, and it's more fun."
It was "nonsense" because you strongly implied that a level-based design was the cause of players wanting to improve themselves. You also implied (by even bringing it up) that this rush to improve ourselves was a "current MMO" thing. You also said (but I didn't address) that players are going to rush through progression in games "no matter what they really want for game play", implying they're going to play games they don't want to play (when in reality if they don't like it, they won't play it.)
I mean you're free to backtrack and say those weren't what you were trying to imply, but gosh it's rather strange you'd word all those points in those specific ways unless those were things you meant to imply.
Nobody called housing leveling. I called it improvement. I was describing how it doesn't matter what form the improvement takes (including leveling), players are going to try to improve their situation rapidly.
(And in every game there will also be some players who won't try to improve their situation in a timely manner. If you think every single modern MMORPG player rushes to max level, you're crazy.)
In every MMORPG players said "don't worry about 'dings'". Please note how uselessly vague it is to point out that more than zero players said this.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
...implying they're going to play games they don't want to play (when in reality if they don't like it, they won't play it.
You don't know people too well.
EDIT: To clarify. In development there is the concept of "painful fun" and it defines a wide range of gameplay and features that are commonly used to incentivize people to play that is not inherently themselves fun to experience or deal with, but are utilized specifically because they can incite a player to feel attachment and react.
Post edited by Deivos on
"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
I agree with everything you said there except the very first comment, "nonsense".
You just proved that what I said was accurate with this post.
Housing is not leveling. -Players spent lots of time designing their houses and decorating them, -held guild meetings, -ran player auctions, -sold their crafts and loot on their vendors, -went around looking for deals from other players houses, -held tournaments of combat- chess- even story telling, -turned their houses into player run taverns, -ran player run events, -held feasts and parties where players could eat and drink from the items on the tables -made libraries -made teleport stations -stored bulk quantities of resources -set up crafting stations -ran town halls -etc., etc., etc.
UO was a Sandbox. A Sandbox that needed to fulfill it's dream and was beset by rampant PKing and stealing. But a different game from the standard where all you do is run level to level through pre-designed and zoned content restricted by level.
In UO players said: "Don't worry about 'dings', just play the game and the skills come just as fast, and it's more fun."
It was "nonsense" because you strongly implied that a level-based design was the cause of players wanting to improve themselves. You also implied (by even bringing it up) that this rush to improve ourselves was a "current MMO" thing. You also said (but I didn't address) that players are going to rush through progression in games "no matter what they really want for game play", implying they're going to play games they don't want to play (when in reality if they don't like it, they won't play it.)
I mean you're free to backtrack and say those weren't what you were trying to imply, but gosh it's rather strange you'd word all those points in those specific ways unless those were things you meant to imply.
Nobody called housing leveling. I called it improvement. I was describing how it doesn't matter what form the improvement takes (including leveling), players are going to try to improve their situation rapidly.
(And in every game there will also be some players who won't try to improve their situation in a timely manner. If you think every single modern MMORPG player rushes to max level, you're crazy.)
In every MMORPG players said "don't worry about 'dings'". Please note how uselessly vague it is to point out that more than zero players said this.
No I didn't. I said that player want to improve themselves, and when the design dictates that the best way (by far) to do that is to simply run leveling quests than that exactly what player will do.
Nobody called housing leveling. I called it improvement. I was
describing how it doesn't matter what form the improvement takes
(including leveling), players are going to try to improve their
situation rapidly.
That is exactly the point I made. And exactly why some of us said you were waffling. Give players something else to succeed at and they will happily do that. Leveling not required!
So a game designer is left with the question: "If players are happy with other forms of improvement (and success), then do we need to direct their actions as with the level grind questing system that is Themepark?"
And that's got nothing to do with "leveling" or "skill gain" in itself. It has to do with the big power gaps that force player actions into "zoned content", and restricting player's freedom to "go where I want, do what I want."
"Ding! And I got this cool gear." "Ding! And look at this, another cool thingamajig." "Ding! Look at me go!" "Ding...again." "Ding." "ding" "Another ding, and all I did was run another quest." "ding...yawn..." "I made End Game! Yay." "End game is so cool, and so am I!" "Is that it? I want more End Game damnit" "This is getting boring, think I'll try another game for a while." ........... "Ding! And look at this cool gear." "Ding! ....wait, I've seen this movie before...." "ding........" "ding........" ................. "You know what? I just realized that I haven't made one meaningful decision in all this gaming. I only did what the designers designed me to do." "What now?" "Damnit, WHAT NOW?" ............ ............. ............... ................
1. So you believe players would be exactly as skilled if they jumped straight into group play as they are with a lengthy period of solo play learning their class? Why imply you believe something so obviously wrong? Are you putting any thought into your posts at all?
2. This is strangely off-topic, why are you bringing it up? Also it's strangely devoid of reason. (A) Obviously it's better for the early part of a game to be less grindy. (B) Obviously in a long-form PVE game with finite dev-produced content, late-game will end up being grindier than early game. Grind is never desirable, but there's no way to magically avoid all grind because games are inevitably going to be repetitive at some point. There's nothing ironic to this, and the conversation in the other thread still holds true that quests are dramatically less grindy than grind-based games.
3. Would you like to quote something specific that you believe is opinion? It seems unlikely you'll be able to, which is why you've stuck to a very vague criticism here.
4. You're not going to get away from Grinding or Questing. Any rewarded activity in a game will either be freeform or formalized. If it's formalized, it's a quest (even if it's called a "mission" or some other name.) If it's freeform, it'll be considered more grindy because it'll allow players to pursue excessive repetition. But this is all off-topic because levels are the reward, they're not how you get the reward. A grind is still a grind even if you're grinding for skill points or items or any other reward. Removing levels doesn't change a thing.
5. Are you suggesting you believe nobody is creating level-based games anymore? Why would you suggest something so obviously wrong? Surely you have the internet and the ability to see that all sorts of games still use levels. MMORPGs stagnating as a genre isn't in any way related to their having levels.
1. I am simply stating the leveling in its current form is very bad practice at the game for group leveling. In fact the practice for group play is group play from early levels. Solo easy mode instances, task and quest where you don't push the limits... don't teach you much.
2. Its actually on the strawman topic you created. "Several asian companies are producing grind-fest MMORPGs -- how well is that philosophy of shallow repetition working out for their western appeal?" Is you're framing the argument that I am talking about supporting MOB grinding when I am talking about no levels at all. This was from the previous argument from the other post which is why I highlighted it. You brought it up again.
3. You're whole argument basically is anything WOW does is right. Also added in "because you're a developer and know better." Guess what I have talked to developers who actually work(ed) on MMORPG. Some believed what I am talking about. Some created what I am talking about. As a self proclaimed developer you seem to have almost no understanding of why players would want anything but "practice" filler quest and end game gear grinds.
4. Again, how can worlds worth of content be more repetitious than a small end games worth. You never touch on it. But you can continue to dance. Questing and killilng mobs becomes a grind when its used as forced progression. I don't grind in most single player RPGs because the narrative, combat and exploration is why I play. MMORPG use token story to justify why you are doing a menial task to rewards you with levels. Often below your characters rank or out of character. Its a relic from when developers wanted to give you things to do to stay subbed.
Take Balders Gate, there wasn't any way to "grind." You played the narrative and naturally leveled up. There weren't a bunch of silly task to say this game had 400 hours of content. The focus of themeparks took freeform grind of MOBs and turned into a structured grind. This causes the narrative to be cheap because nobody is going to write quality story for why you're killing 10 wolves. The issue is that leveling became the focus of the quest and task instead the narrative.
5. No I am saying that no big developer is making anything at all. There is a relationship between the problems of the genre and vast vertical progression.
No I didn't. I said that player want to improve themselves, and when the design dictates that the best way (by far) to do that is to simply run leveling quests than that exactly what player will do.
That is exactly the point I made. And exactly why some of us said you were waffling. Give players something else to succeed at and they will happily do that. Leveling not required!
So a game designer is left with the question: "If players are happy with other forms of improvement (and success), then do we need to direct their actions as with the level grind questing system that is Themepark?"
And that's got nothing to do with "leveling" or "skill gain" in itself. It has to do with the big power gaps that force player actions into "zoned content", and restricting player's freedom to "go where I want, do what I want."
You've called levels the "be-all-and-end-all" of these games, which strongly implied you believe it's levels specifically that are driving this behavior.
My posts have been consistent. You're free to try to find evidence of my "waffling", and post it instead of making vague accusations based on zero evidence.
Leveling isn't required. But it serves its function slightly better than any other progression metric due to its elegant simplicity. On the flip side there isn't a good reason not to use levels. And so levels are used. (After all we've covered that players will rush to improve themselves with or without levels, so that isn't a factor. Which means the only reason you'd change would be change for change's sake.)
Your question has already been answered over on the Vermilion side of the thread. Start here and follow it through if you want to understand why questing is used. It's about gameplay variety. It's about not letting players grind themselves into quitting.
You're right that questing has nothing to do with the topic at hand (which sort of begs why you're bringing it up), and you're wrong the power gaps make any difference (because questing brings variety to a game regardless of how big the power gaps are.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I'm absolutely shocked at how polarizing this discussion has become. I had no idea that the level/class system was so staunchly defended.
I was always under the impression that we used class and level based paradigm because it was easy to design early games around them. I had always assumed that as game development progressed through the years we would get away from this elementary system and move towards a system where people can play characters rather than playing a level/class.
1. I am simply stating the leveling in its current form is very bad practice at the game for group leveling. In fact the practice for group play is group play from early levels. Solo easy mode instances, task and quest where you don't push the limits... don't teach you much.
2. Its actually on the strawman topic you created. "Several asian companies are producing grind-fest MMORPGs -- how well is that philosophy of shallow repetition working out for their western appeal?" Is you're framing the argument that I am talking about supporting MOB grinding when I am talking about no levels at all. This was from the previous argument from the other post which is why I highlighted it. You brought it up again.
3. You're whole argument basically is anything WOW does is right. Also added in "because you're a developer and know better." Guess what I have talked to developers who actually work(ed) on MMORPG. Some believed what I am talking about. Some created what I am talking about. As a self proclaimed developer you seem to have almost no understanding of why players would want anything but "practice" filler quest and end game gear grinds.
4. Again, how can worlds worth of content be more repetitious than a small end games worth. You never touch on it. But you can continue to dance. Questing and killilng mobs becomes a grind when its used as forced progression. I don't grind in most single player RPGs because the narrative, combat and exploration is why I play. MMORPG use token story to justify why you are doing a menial task to rewards you with levels. Often below your characters rank or out of character. Its a relic from when developers wanted to give you things to do to stay subbed.
Take Balders Gate, there wasn't any way to "grind." You played the narrative and naturally leveled up. There weren't a bunch of silly task to say this game had 400 hours of content. The focus of themeparks took freeform grind of MOBs and turned into a structured grind. This causes the narrative to be cheap because nobody is going to write quality story for why you're killing 10 wolves. The issue is that leveling became the focus of the quest and task instead the narrative.
5. No I am saying that no big developer is making anything at all. There is a relationship between the problems of the genre and vast vertical progression.
Leveling isn't "very bad" at teaching players how to play. It's fairly good actually, as players get a lot of practice playing before they start grouping. It would certainly be more interesting to me to have harder difficulty options throughout a game's progression, but that doesn't mean the game setup is significantly flawed.
It's not a straw man, it's a style of play quite similar to mob-grind games and its unpopularity is the result of these games' excessive grind. Repetition without variety isn't popular. Quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. How many times must I state these two facts before you understand?
When I post, it's a combination of logic, observation, and experience. Logically, quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. (Great variety is possible, but not in a long-form game.) We can observe that excessive repetition isn't popular, as there are no examples of excessively repetitive games which are as successful as similar games that offer less repetition. As for the developers who believed what you're talking about, how successful did their games turn out to be, eh?
I've explained this to you many times. You reach max level. Now: do you want to repeat an existing zone, or play a new zone? It's more variety. That's why they keep adding new zones, raids, and dungeons, rather than send you back to repeat the old stuff. Your BG comments are strange, given that narrative was questing.
Big developers are making plenty of games. MMORPGs may be stagnating, but not "anything at all". RPGs have always been about progression, and a very noticeable progression (like the kind you're calling "vast vertical progression") has proven successful over and over. There is absolutely no risk of these games no longer being made. There will always be PVE RPGs with substantial progression.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Leveling isn't "very bad" at teaching players how to play. It's fairly good actually, as players get a lot of practice playing before they start grouping. It would certainly be more interesting to me to have harder difficulty options throughout a game's progression, but that doesn't mean the game setup is significantly flawed.
It's not a straw man, it's a style of play quite similar to mob-grind games and its unpopularity is the result of these games' excessive grind. Repetition without variety isn't popular. Quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. How many times must I state these two facts before you understand?
When I post, it's a combination of logic, observation, and experience. Logically, quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. (Great variety is possible, but not in a long-form game.) We can observe that excessive repetition isn't popular, as there are no examples of excessively repetitive games which are as successful as similar games that offer less repetition. As for the developers who believed what you're talking about, how successful did their games turn out to be, eh?
I've explained this to you many times. You reach max level. Now: do you want to repeat an existing zone, or play a new zone? It's more variety. That's why they keep adding new zones, raids, and dungeons, rather than send you back to repeat the old stuff. Your BG comments are strange, given that narrative was questing.
Big developers are making plenty of games. MMORPGs may be stagnating, but not "anything at all". RPGs have always been about progression, and a very noticeable progression (like the kind you're calling "vast vertical progression") has proven successful over and over. There is absolutely no risk of these games no longer being made. There will always be PVE RPGs with substantial progression.
1. That's opinion.
2. Yes, it is strawman because you bring up something I am not talking about. How do you grind if there is little to grind? I never said anything about removing quest... just stupid task. Its about removing leveling which removes progression through questing and task.
And you're not explaining how being able to reuse the world and end game content isn't more variety than being stuck in just end game content after a short leveling experience?
If you reuse 30 areas unlimited times plus say 4 raids vs. being stuck in end game using the same 4 raids over and over after using the 30 world zones once. Anyone reasonable can do the math to see which one is more varied.
3. if you have no levels you can have more choice when you can pick and choose where and how you want to quest, explore, craft, hunt and raid. You also can balance the game towards exploration and other things since you're not grind out levels. You're doing activities you like. Its like you've obvious to this.
Nobody is saying out right eliminate quest. We're saying eliminate vast vertical progression tied to questing. This takes up the vast majority of your content but it's still short. It puts pressure on developers to make dumb task that don't even fit your character. After you level the vast majority of your time is repetitious of a few actives.
4. That's a fallacy because you can reuse the whole world and raids. You can also add new areas as well. The difference is you're not tied to the same few end game areas. You do know the point of this is that questing for narrative is better than questing just to progress. Many MMORPG quest are excuses for you to do something, be content and progress vs. advance the narrative or be fun.
5. We are talking about MMORPG. Usually single player RPG have achievement as just a portion of the game not the whole game like MMORPG. The quest drive a narrative.
Leveling isn't "very bad" at teaching players how to play. It's fairly good actually, as players get a lot of practice playing before they start grouping. It would certainly be more interesting to me to have harder difficulty options throughout a game's progression, but that doesn't mean the game setup is significantly flawed.
It's not a straw man, it's a style of play quite similar to mob-grind games and its unpopularity is the result of these games' excessive grind. Repetition without variety isn't popular. Quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. How many times must I state these two facts before you understand?
When I post, it's a combination of logic, observation, and experience. Logically, quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. (Great variety is possible, but not in a long-form game.) We can observe that excessive repetition isn't popular, as there are no examples of excessively repetitive games which are as successful as similar games that offer less repetition. As for the developers who believed what you're talking about, how successful did their games turn out to be, eh?
I've explained this to you many times. You reach max level. Now: do you want to repeat an existing zone, or play a new zone? It's more variety. That's why they keep adding new zones, raids, and dungeons, rather than send you back to repeat the old stuff. Your BG comments are strange, given that narrative was questing.
Big developers are making plenty of games. MMORPGs may be stagnating, but not "anything at all". RPGs have always been about progression, and a very noticeable progression (like the kind you're calling "vast vertical progression") has proven successful over and over. There is absolutely no risk of these games no longer being made. There will always be PVE RPGs with substantial progression.
1. That's opinion.
2. Yes, it is strawman because you bring up something I am not talking about. How do you grind if there is little to grind? I never said anything about removing quest... just stupid task. Its about removing leveling which removes progression through questing and task.
And you're not explaining how being able to reuse the world and end game content isn't more variety than being stuck in just end game content after a short leveling experience?
If you reuse 30 areas unlimited times plus say 4 raids vs. being stuck in end game using the same 4 raids over and over after using the 30 world zones once. Anyone reasonable can do the math to see which one is more varied.
3. if you have no levels you can have more choice when you can pick and choose where and how you want to quest, explore, craft, hunt and raid. You also can balance the game towards exploration and other things since you're not grind out levels. You're doing activities you like. Its like you've obvious to this.
Nobody is saying out right eliminate quest. We're saying eliminate vast vertical progression tied to questing. This takes up the vast majority of your content but it's still short. It puts pressure on developers to make dumb task that don't even fit your character. After you level the vast majority of your time is repetitious of a few actives.
4. That's a fallacy because you can reuse the whole world and raids. You can also add new areas as well. The difference is you're not tied to the same few end game areas. You do know the point of this is that questing for narrative is better than questing just to progress. Many MMORPG quest are excuses for you to do something, be content and progress vs. advance the narrative or be fun.
5. We are talking about MMORPG. Usually single player RPG have achievement as just a portion of the game not the whole game like MMORPG. The quest drive a narrative.
Do you like repetition in games (AkA GRIND?)? You must love it if you like your 4. Or are you one of these weeping it is so sad that this content is still viable cry cry cry people? How about just having the starting zone and have that be the entire game?
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what
it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience
because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in
the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you
playing an MMORPG?"
Leveling isn't "very bad" at teaching players how to play. It's fairly good actually, as players get a lot of practice playing before they start grouping. It would certainly be more interesting to me to have harder difficulty options throughout a game's progression, but that doesn't mean the game setup is significantly flawed.
It's not a straw man, it's a style of play quite similar to mob-grind games and its unpopularity is the result of these games' excessive grind. Repetition without variety isn't popular. Quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. How many times must I state these two facts before you understand?
When I post, it's a combination of logic, observation, and experience. Logically, quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. (Great variety is possible, but not in a long-form game.) We can observe that excessive repetition isn't popular, as there are no examples of excessively repetitive games which are as successful as similar games that offer less repetition. As for the developers who believed what you're talking about, how successful did their games turn out to be, eh?
I've explained this to you many times. You reach max level. Now: do you want to repeat an existing zone, or play a new zone? It's more variety. That's why they keep adding new zones, raids, and dungeons, rather than send you back to repeat the old stuff. Your BG comments are strange, given that narrative was questing.
Big developers are making plenty of games. MMORPGs may be stagnating, but not "anything at all". RPGs have always been about progression, and a very noticeable progression (like the kind you're calling "vast vertical progression") has proven successful over and over. There is absolutely no risk of these games no longer being made. There will always be PVE RPGs with substantial progression.
1. That's opinion.
2. Yes, it is strawman because you bring up something I am not talking about. How do you grind if there is little to grind? I never said anything about removing quest... just stupid task. Its about removing leveling which removes progression through questing and task.
And you're not explaining how being able to reuse the world and end game content isn't more variety than being stuck in just end game content after a short leveling experience?
If you reuse 30 areas unlimited times plus say 4 raids vs. being stuck in end game using the same 4 raids over and over after using the 30 world zones once. Anyone reasonable can do the math to see which one is more varied.
3. if you have no levels you can have more choice when you can pick and choose where and how you want to quest, explore, craft, hunt and raid. You also can balance the game towards exploration and other things since you're not grind out levels. You're doing activities you like. Its like you've obvious to this.
Nobody is saying out right eliminate quest. We're saying eliminate vast vertical progression tied to questing. This takes up the vast majority of your content but it's still short. It puts pressure on developers to make dumb task that don't even fit your character. After you level the vast majority of your time is repetitious of a few actives.
4. That's a fallacy because you can reuse the whole world and raids. You can also add new areas as well. The difference is you're not tied to the same few end game areas. You do know the point of this is that questing for narrative is better than questing just to progress. Many MMORPG quest are excuses for you to do something, be content and progress vs. advance the narrative or be fun.
5. We are talking about MMORPG. Usually single player RPG have achievement as just a portion of the game not the whole game like MMORPG. The quest drive a narrative.
In the case of most RPG's your goal is narrative, once the narrative is done, there's little to do without extensive modding tools, which only a few games come equipped with in any given generation.
This is the logical reason why progression is used in the manner it is in an MMORPG. It also explains the filler you're complaining about. Even with that progression slowing folks down, they blast through content as well as exploration. It's a very finite focus, that can run out rather quick even in huge gameworlds. WIthout that progression most MMORPG's would wither and die, as well as a huge segment of the audience that has been there since the beginning.
It's the progression that keeps most people around outside of PVP and trade oriented players. Unless you want an endless grind, which the Asian market pretty much has covered.
What it sounds like you want is an adventurers sandbox. Yet unless you want it to be a game of territory control as well as guild to guild conflict, what do you plan to offer that will keep players going? How do you offer infinite adventure?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Leveling isn't "very bad" at teaching players how to play. It's fairly good actually, as players get a lot of practice playing before they start grouping. It would certainly be more interesting to me to have harder difficulty options throughout a game's progression, but that doesn't mean the game setup is significantly flawed.
It's not a straw man, it's a style of play quite similar to mob-grind games and its unpopularity is the result of these games' excessive grind. Repetition without variety isn't popular. Quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. How many times must I state these two facts before you understand?
When I post, it's a combination of logic, observation, and experience. Logically, quests provide the most variety possible in a long-form game. (Great variety is possible, but not in a long-form game.) We can observe that excessive repetition isn't popular, as there are no examples of excessively repetitive games which are as successful as similar games that offer less repetition. As for the developers who believed what you're talking about, how successful did their games turn out to be, eh?
I've explained this to you many times. You reach max level. Now: do you want to repeat an existing zone, or play a new zone? It's more variety. That's why they keep adding new zones, raids, and dungeons, rather than send you back to repeat the old stuff. Your BG comments are strange, given that narrative was questing.
Big developers are making plenty of games. MMORPGs may be stagnating, but not "anything at all". RPGs have always been about progression, and a very noticeable progression (like the kind you're calling "vast vertical progression") has proven successful over and over. There is absolutely no risk of these games no longer being made. There will always be PVE RPGs with substantial progression.
1. That's opinion.
2. Yes, it is strawman because you bring up something I am not talking about. How do you grind if there is little to grind? I never said anything about removing quest... just stupid task. Its about removing leveling which removes progression through questing and task.
And you're not explaining how being able to reuse the world and end game content isn't more variety than being stuck in just end game content after a short leveling experience?
If you reuse 30 areas unlimited times plus say 4 raids vs. being stuck in end game using the same 4 raids over and over after using the 30 world zones once. Anyone reasonable can do the math to see which one is more varied.
3. if you have no levels you can have more choice when you can pick and choose where and how you want to quest, explore, craft, hunt and raid. You also can balance the game towards exploration and other things since you're not grind out levels. You're doing activities you like. Its like you've obvious to this.
Nobody is saying out right eliminate quest. We're saying eliminate vast vertical progression tied to questing. This takes up the vast majority of your content but it's still short. It puts pressure on developers to make dumb task that don't even fit your character. After you level the vast majority of your time is repetitious of a few actives.
4. That's a fallacy because you can reuse the whole world and raids. You can also add new areas as well. The difference is you're not tied to the same few end game areas. You do know the point of this is that questing for narrative is better than questing just to progress. Many MMORPG quest are excuses for you to do something, be content and progress vs. advance the narrative or be fun.
5. We are talking about MMORPG. Usually single player RPG have achievement as just a portion of the game not the whole game like MMORPG. The quest drive a narrative.
Do you like repetition in games (AkA GRIND?)? You must love it if you like your 4. Or are you one of these weeping it is so sad that this content is still viable cry cry cry people? How about just having the starting zone and have that be the entire game?
What are you talking about? Do you understand the concept of levelless games. You can have as much questing as a normal themepark and the same amount of raiding. Except you're not forced to do them in any particular order or not at all if they don't like the narrative. Areas are done with difficulty vs. just being viable only at your level range.
What are you talking about? Do you understand the concept of levelless games. You can have as much questing as a normal themepark and the same amount of raiding. Except you're not forced to do them in any particular order or not at all if they don't like the narrative. Areas are done with difficulty vs. just being viable only at your level range.
What I for one do understand about such games in the multi-player world is that they're almost always centered around conflict between players, or building... They're almost never based on adventuring and questing. They also offer very little in the form of interesting PVE mechanics, outside of some glorified horde mode. Without levels and boundaries tied to their progression.. people would eat up such content, as well as exploration in a manner of weeks. It would be a painstaking operation to offer years worth of such content.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
I would like to see something like Morrowind fap fap 1 handed sword fap fap 2 handed Jump 100k time to lvl Athletics increase ur stamina reduce Sprint stamina consuming LVL Strength after 100 points you lose Dexterity 101 str -1 stam and also Athletics is 50 % less effective common sens from real world
Every 25 lvl in weapon mastery opens a better faster more complected animation (ability to select which animation we like or set a chain of skill )
Combos
300 Athletics 300 1handed Unlock a special attack
300 1 handed sword 300 Fire magic unlock special Toggle spell (molten weapon)
The is so much we could improve character progress
The Problem is it would be very complex and extremely hard to balance ........ Balance is one of factor that ruins MMORPG
Did you saw what shit Blizzard did with their passive tree in Pandaria ?..... In Next expansion it will be a little fixed cross finger for something decent
First where I saw skills do differ in PVP and PVE was gw2 but for very few skills still there are many OP combos
Blizzard is doing same with Legion PVP Talent tree and Pve talents I hope more game will take this trend
Personally I don't care of PVP any more I get older and my reactions are slower I also spend less time in game and my Piano Rotation is much much slower .....
There are thousands of way to improve Character progression problem is in balance issue ..
Another cool Feature I didn't seen any were else is Skill progress in Cabal online.....with each lvl skill has slightly different effect ..
There are dozen of character progressions that could be combined to bring something complex and entertaining .....but it will require a lot of balance and Development time ....dont think this is priority nr. 1 in these companies ... give up ....and give up on perfect mmo will never happen
MMO industry is same as movie blockbuster industry
Shit MMORPG= Hype 50% of project budget >cash grab >Staff reductions> Retarded expansions equal to 10 % of full game for full price ......
I would like to see something like Morrowind fap fap 1 handed sword fap fap 2 handed Jump 100k time to lvl Athletics increase ur stamina reduce Sprint stamina consuming LVL Strength after 100 points you lose Dexterity 101 str -1 stam and also Athletics is 50 % less effective common sens from real world
Every 25 lvl in weapon mastery opens a better faster more complected animation (ability to select which animation we like or set a chain of skill )
Combos
300 Athletics 300 1handed Unlock a special attack
300 1 handed sword 300 Fire magic unlock special Toggle spell (molten weapon)
The is so much we could improve character progress
The Problem is it would be very complex and extremely hard to balance ........ Balance is one of factor that ruins MMORPG
Did you saw what shit Blizzard did with their passive tree in Pandaria ?..... In Next expansion it will be a little fixed cross finger for something decent
First where I saw skills do differ in PVP and PVE was gw2 but for very few skills still there are many OP combos
Blizzard is doing same with Legion PVP Talent tree and Pve talents I hope more game will take this trend
Personally I don't care of PVP any more I get older and my reactions are slower I also spend less time in game and my Piano Rotation is much much slower .....
There are thousands of way to improve Character progression problem is in balance issue ..
Another cool Feature I didn't seen any were else is Skill progress in Cabal online.....with each lvl skill has slightly different effect ..
There are dozen of character progressions that could be combined to bring something complex and entertaining .....but it will require a lot of balance and Development time ....dont think this is priority nr. 1 in these companies ... give up ....and give up on perfect mmo will never happen
MMO industry is same as movie blockbuster industry
Shit MMORPG= Hype 50% of project budget >cash grab >Staff reductions> Retarded expansions equal to 10 % of full game for full price ......
I would like to see something like Morrowind fap fap 1 handed sword fap fap 2 handed Jump 100k time to lvl Athletics increase ur stamina reduce Sprint stamina consuming LVL Strength after 100 points you lose Dexterity 101 str -1 stam and also Athletics is 50 % less effective common sens from real world
Every 25 lvl in weapon mastery opens a better faster more complected animation (ability to select which animation we like or set a chain of skill )
Combos
300 Athletics 300 1handed Unlock a special attack
300 1 handed sword 300 Fire magic unlock special Toggle spell (molten weapon)
The is so much we could improve character progress
The Problem is it would be very complex and extremely hard to balance ........ Balance is one of factor that ruins MMORPG
Did you saw what shit Blizzard did with their passive tree in Pandaria ?..... In Next expansion it will be a little fixed cross finger for something decent
First where I saw skills do differ in PVP and PVE was gw2 but for very few skills still there are many OP combos
Blizzard is doing same with Legion PVP Talent tree and Pve talents I hope more game will take this trend
Personally I don't care of PVP any more I get older and my reactions are slower I also spend less time in game and my Piano Rotation is much much slower .....
There are thousands of way to improve Character progression problem is in balance issue ..
Another cool Feature I didn't seen any were else is Skill progress in Cabal online.....with each lvl skill has slightly different effect ..
There are dozen of character progressions that could be combined to bring something complex and entertaining .....but it will require a lot of balance and Development time ....dont think this is priority nr. 1 in these companies ... give up ....and give up on perfect mmo will never happen
MMO industry is same as movie blockbuster industry
Shit MMORPG= Hype 50% of project budget >cash grab >Staff reductions> Retarded expansions equal to 10 % of full game for full price ......
I like the concept, but I find the execution to be a bit unfun. Often you have to jump without any real purpose over and over again to get the skill up. It doesn't go up naturally because you are a thief and need to jump over gaps between rooftops or something of that nature. There must be a way to make it go up naturally. I often think of old kungfu movies where they go to train. One I recently watched had the person going Shaolin temple and building a roof on it as training for kungfu. They also had to splash water on their head to wash their face by dropping a rock in a well in a certain way.
Comments
eing a developer you should understand and know there are other philosophies. Other developers have different view points and some share mine. I didn't invent the view point.
Other philosophies doesn't mean those philosophies are wise ones. Several asian companies are producing grind-fest MMORPGs -- how well is that philosophy of shallow repetition working out for their western appeal?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Two, you've actually consistently failed to address his question. Your explanation at best only says that the games are designed as they are because "endgame" as it is designed demands it.
It fails to explain the reason to design endgame in that manner in the first place, or have a design that pushes "endgame" as the primary trend at all.
You are also not the only developer here or in the world, so acting like your opinions on development is the gospel is utterly fallacious.
"Short" levels and a push to drop people into the far-end of the game's content and shifting the focus of the content so distinctly does not explain the attainment of "enough fun that lots of them are still playing". All you offered there is a narrow window of design options for games that doesn't even ascribe any content or features that would make the experience remotely "fun". It also fails to relate to level pacing or mechanics.
As such, you basically just spent your time dodging the problem asserted that the "journey" in the game is simply not great or deep.
You even contradict yourself by first asserting that the game design is focused on delivering players to the endgame content, but then you say that the early content is what needs the greatest focus/optimization for player retention. One or the other there, buddy.
"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
1. If that's the case they are very poor mechanics as a tutorial. Most players don't know how to properly play their classes because of the speed and lack of challenge in the content. Most players learn how to play by Youtube and imitate parsed rotations.
2. You still are ignoring your own irony. You are saying that MOB grind(which is also criticize) are grinds. Yet gear grinds of the end game are anything but repetitious grinds in a small area of the world. (Other post)You never addressed how revisiting the whole world is more repetitious than revisiting a few raids and daily in a few instances. You never address why you have to have "endgame" instead of "whole game" being the activity.
3. You use your opinion as fact. You're trying to argue me as endorsing grind when I am against MOB grinds and forced filler task.
My support of lack of levels comes from desire not to do mindless things like MOB grinding and filler task just to say I have content. Those actions are not fun but are required to reach a goal in MMORPG. People do it because they're rewarded. Its mediocre content that nobody would do if it wasn't required to level. I prefer not to focus the whole game on leveling like it is now.
If this is such a great system then why is nobody else creating it anymore? Why are most MMORPG losing players despite them not even paying for it?
I'm just saying, for those who want to move away from this old system, support CoE and redefine the genre
2. This is strangely off-topic, why are you bringing it up? Also it's strangely devoid of reason. (A) Obviously it's better for the early part of a game to be less grindy. (B) Obviously in a long-form PVE game with finite dev-produced content, late-game will end up being grindier than early game. Grind is never desirable, but there's no way to magically avoid all grind because games are inevitably going to be repetitive at some point. There's nothing ironic to this, and the conversation in the other thread still holds true that quests are dramatically less grindy than grind-based games.
3. Would you like to quote something specific that you believe is opinion? It seems unlikely you'll be able to, which is why you've stuck to a very vague criticism here.
4. You're not going to get away from Grinding or Questing. Any rewarded activity in a game will either be freeform or formalized. If it's formalized, it's a quest (even if it's called a "mission" or some other name.) If it's freeform, it'll be considered more grindy because it'll allow players to pursue excessive repetition. But this is all off-topic because levels are the reward, they're not how you get the reward. A grind is still a grind even if you're grinding for skill points or items or any other reward. Removing levels doesn't change a thing.
5. Are you suggesting you believe nobody is creating level-based games anymore? Why would you suggest something so obviously wrong? Surely you have the internet and the ability to see that all sorts of games still use levels. MMORPGs stagnating as a genre isn't in any way related to their having levels.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Age and dying doesn't help in this game's case. I myself would find that interesting except for the short time period before old age death.
This topic's points aren't the only ones involved in releasing a "good game". There are other issues. Cash Shops, PvP, locked this and that, world (or lack thereof), lots and lots of issues to consider.
Once upon a time....
I agree with everything you said there except the very first comment, "nonsense".
You just proved that what I said was accurate with this post.
Housing is not leveling.
-Players spent lots of time designing their houses and decorating them,
-held guild meetings,
-ran player auctions,
-sold their crafts and loot on their vendors,
-went around looking for deals from other players houses,
-held tournaments of combat- chess- even story telling,
-turned their houses into player run taverns,
-ran player run events,
-held feasts and parties where players could eat and drink from the items on the tables
-made libraries
-made teleport stations
-stored bulk quantities of resources
-set up crafting stations
-ran town halls
-etc., etc., etc.
UO was a Sandbox. A Sandbox that needed to fulfill it's dream and was beset by rampant PKing and stealing. But a different game from the standard where all you do is run level to level through pre-designed and zoned content restricted by level.
In UO players said:
"Don't worry about 'dings', just play the game and the skills come just as fast, and it's more fun."
Once upon a time....
"Other philosophies doesn't mean those philosophies are wise ones."
"You're not going to get away from Grinding or Questing."
"If it's formalized, it's a quest"
"at endgame in a MMORPG there's still a lot left to do"
"In an RTS game you're making a nonstop series of decisions in real-time."
"travel isn't offering additional gameplay"
"RPGs are about narrative, progression, and stats-based combat."
"What I'm describing is rooted in how players enjoy games."
"Enough sucking happens in players' normal lives..."
"My ignoring the rest of the argument is irrelevant, because all I've cited is a simple undeniable fact."
There's tons more, but citing entire posts just wouldn't fit.
EDIT: @Amaranthar Yeah that one confused me when he disagreed and them immediately supported your argument.
"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
I mean you're free to backtrack and say those weren't what you were trying to imply, but gosh it's rather strange you'd word all those points in those specific ways unless those were things you meant to imply.
Nobody called housing leveling. I called it improvement. I was describing how it doesn't matter what form the improvement takes (including leveling), players are going to try to improve their situation rapidly.
(And in every game there will also be some players who won't try to improve their situation in a timely manner. If you think every single modern MMORPG player rushes to max level, you're crazy.)
In every MMORPG players said "don't worry about 'dings'". Please note how uselessly vague it is to point out that more than zero players said this.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
EDIT: To clarify. In development there is the concept of "painful fun" and it defines a wide range of gameplay and features that are commonly used to incentivize people to play that is not inherently themselves fun to experience or deal with, but are utilized specifically because they can incite a player to feel attachment and react.
"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
I said that player want to improve themselves, and when the design dictates that the best way (by far) to do that is to simply run leveling quests than that exactly what player will do.
That is exactly the point I made. And exactly why some of us said you were waffling.
Give players something else to succeed at and they will happily do that.
Leveling not required!
So a game designer is left with the question:
"If players are happy with other forms of improvement (and success), then do we need to direct their actions as with the level grind questing system that is Themepark?"
And that's got nothing to do with "leveling" or "skill gain" in itself. It has to do with the big power gaps that force player actions into "zoned content", and restricting player's freedom to "go where I want, do what I want."
Once upon a time....
"Ding! And look at this, another cool thingamajig."
"Ding! Look at me go!"
"Ding...again."
"Ding."
"ding"
"Another ding, and all I did was run another quest."
"ding...yawn..."
"I made End Game! Yay."
"End game is so cool, and so am I!"
"Is that it? I want more End Game damnit"
"This is getting boring, think I'll try another game for a while."
...........
"Ding! And look at this cool gear."
"Ding! ....wait, I've seen this movie before...."
"ding........"
"ding........"
.................
"You know what? I just realized that I haven't made one meaningful decision in all this gaming. I only did what the designers designed me to do."
"What now?"
"Damnit, WHAT NOW?"
............
.............
...............
................
Once upon a time....
1. I am simply stating the leveling in its current form is very bad practice at the game for group leveling. In fact the practice for group play is group play from early levels. Solo easy mode instances, task and quest where you don't push the limits... don't teach you much.
2. Its actually on the strawman topic you created. "Several asian companies are producing grind-fest MMORPGs -- how well is that philosophy of shallow repetition working out for their western appeal?" Is you're framing the argument that I am talking about supporting MOB grinding when I am talking about no levels at all. This was from the previous argument from the other post which is why I highlighted it. You brought it up again.
3. You're whole argument basically is anything WOW does is right. Also added in "because you're a developer and know better." Guess what I have talked to developers who actually work(ed) on MMORPG. Some believed what I am talking about. Some created what I am talking about. As a self proclaimed developer you seem to have almost no understanding of why players would want anything but "practice" filler quest and end game gear grinds.
4. Again, how can worlds worth of content be more repetitious than a small end games worth. You never touch on it. But you can continue to dance. Questing and killilng mobs becomes a grind when its used as forced progression. I don't grind in most single player RPGs because the narrative, combat and exploration is why I play. MMORPG use token story to justify why you are doing a menial task to rewards you with levels. Often below your characters rank or out of character. Its a relic from when developers wanted to give you things to do to stay subbed.
Take Balders Gate, there wasn't any way to "grind." You played the narrative and naturally leveled up. There weren't a bunch of silly task to say this game had 400 hours of content. The focus of themeparks took freeform grind of MOBs and turned into a structured grind. This causes the narrative to be cheap because nobody is going to write quality story for why you're killing 10 wolves. The issue is that leveling became the focus of the quest and task instead the narrative.
5. No I am saying that no big developer is making anything at all. There is a relationship between the problems of the genre and vast vertical progression.
My posts have been consistent. You're free to try to find evidence of my "waffling", and post it instead of making vague accusations based on zero evidence.
Leveling isn't required. But it serves its function slightly better than any other progression metric due to its elegant simplicity. On the flip side there isn't a good reason not to use levels. And so levels are used. (After all we've covered that players will rush to improve themselves with or without levels, so that isn't a factor. Which means the only reason you'd change would be change for change's sake.)
Your question has already been answered over on the Vermilion side of the thread. Start here and follow it through if you want to understand why questing is used. It's about gameplay variety. It's about not letting players grind themselves into quitting.
You're right that questing has nothing to do with the topic at hand (which sort of begs why you're bringing it up), and you're wrong the power gaps make any difference (because questing brings variety to a game regardless of how big the power gaps are.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I was always under the impression that we used class and level based paradigm because it was easy to design early games around them. I had always assumed that as game development progressed through the years we would get away from this elementary system and move towards a system where people can play characters rather than playing a level/class.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
2. Yes, it is strawman because you bring up something I am not talking about. How do you grind if there is little to grind? I never said anything about removing quest... just stupid task. Its about removing leveling which removes progression through questing and task.
And you're not explaining how being able to reuse the world and end game content isn't more variety than being stuck in just end game content after a short leveling experience?
If you reuse 30 areas unlimited times plus say 4 raids vs. being stuck in end game using the same 4 raids over and over after using the 30 world zones once. Anyone reasonable can do the math to see which one is more varied.
3. if you have no levels you can have more choice when you can pick and choose where and how you want to quest, explore, craft, hunt and raid. You also can balance the game towards exploration and other things since you're not grind out levels. You're doing activities you like. Its like you've obvious to this.
Nobody is saying out right eliminate quest. We're saying eliminate vast vertical progression tied to questing. This takes up the vast majority of your content but it's still short. It puts pressure on developers to make dumb task that don't even fit your character. After you level the vast majority of your time is repetitious of a few actives.
4. That's a fallacy because you can reuse the whole world and raids. You can also add new areas as well. The difference is you're not tied to the same few end game areas. You do know the point of this is that questing for narrative is better than questing just to progress. Many MMORPG quest are excuses for you to do something, be content and progress vs. advance the narrative or be fun.
5. We are talking about MMORPG. Usually single player RPG have achievement as just a portion of the game not the whole game like MMORPG. The quest drive a narrative.
Do you like repetition in games (AkA GRIND?)? You must love it if you like your 4. Or are you one of these weeping it is so sad that this content is still viable cry cry cry people? How about just having the starting zone and have that be the entire game?
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
This is the logical reason why progression is used in the manner it is in an MMORPG. It also explains the filler you're complaining about. Even with that progression slowing folks down, they blast through content as well as exploration. It's a very finite focus, that can run out rather quick even in huge gameworlds. WIthout that progression most MMORPG's would wither and die, as well as a huge segment of the audience that has been there since the beginning.
It's the progression that keeps most people around outside of PVP and trade oriented players. Unless you want an endless grind, which the Asian market pretty much has covered.
What it sounds like you want is an adventurers sandbox. Yet unless you want it to be a game of territory control as well as guild to guild conflict, what do you plan to offer that will keep players going? How do you offer infinite adventure?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
fap fap 1 handed sword
fap fap 2 handed
Jump 100k time to lvl Athletics increase ur stamina reduce Sprint stamina consuming
LVL Strength after 100 points you lose Dexterity 101 str -1 stam and also Athletics is 50 % less effective common sens from real world
Every 25 lvl in weapon mastery opens a better faster more complected animation (ability to select which animation we like or set a chain of skill )
Combos
300 Athletics 300 1handed Unlock a special attack
300 1 handed sword 300 Fire magic unlock special Toggle spell (molten weapon)
The is so much we could improve character progress
The Problem is it would be very complex and extremely hard to balance ........
Balance is one of factor that ruins MMORPG
Did you saw what shit Blizzard did with their passive tree in Pandaria ?.....
In Next expansion it will be a little fixed cross finger for something decent
First where I saw skills do differ in PVP and PVE was gw2 but for very few skills still there are many OP combos
Blizzard is doing same with Legion PVP Talent tree and Pve talents
I hope more game will take this trend
Personally I don't care of PVP any more I get older and my reactions are slower I also spend less time in game and my Piano Rotation is much much slower .....
There are thousands of way to improve Character progression problem is in balance issue ..
Another cool Feature I didn't seen any were else is Skill progress in Cabal online.....with each lvl skill has slightly different effect ..
There are dozen of character progressions that could be combined to bring something complex and entertaining .....but it will require a lot of balance and Development time ....dont think this is priority nr. 1 in these companies ...
give up ....and give up on perfect mmo will never happen
MMO industry is same as movie blockbuster industry
Shit MMORPG= Hype 50% of project budget >cash grab >Staff reductions> Retarded expansions equal to 10 % of full game for full price ......
I like the concept, but I find the execution to be a bit unfun. Often you have to jump without any real purpose over and over again to get the skill up. It doesn't go up naturally because you are a thief and need to jump over gaps between rooftops or something of that nature. There must be a way to make it go up naturally. I often think of old kungfu movies where they go to train. One I recently watched had the person going Shaolin temple and building a roof on it as training for kungfu. They also had to splash water on their head to wash their face by dropping a rock in a well in a certain way.