I give you a hind . MMO = long term , RPG = progression . And he said remove the grind while compare it to MOBA .
PS : you can't remove the grind cause even kill 2 same things count as grind .
I don't think killing is considered a grind. Killing over and over to reach a goal or reward is more a grind.
For example when I played BG 1 and 2 I never felt like I was grinding because killing, progression and combat was part of the narrative. They were secondary.
In MMORPG progression and reward are the primary objectives. Narratives and repetition are the secondary fuel and barriers to reaching the primary objective. Even further you have the end game which is viewed as the "real game." Not to mention levels are not about increased challenge but increase in numbers(progression).
Much of the narrative and repetition are poor and overdone because people care more about the reward/progression. The more repetition the more content a developer can claim. It's a pure achievement based model. One reason why I believe the genre is niche because most gamers don't find the typical quest/task acceptable or fun.
Daoc did endgame grind right prior to TOA. The "grind" happened while you were doing what you loved the most......RvR. When progression is tied into doing what you love there is no grind.
I think it's an issue of finding a balance between "progression" which is something that keeps players coming back for more and having a level playing field in PvP.
I'm sure this is a topic that has been discussed ad infinitum at games conferences and in schools around the globe. I also believe there are more games than just Planetside that are pretty close to what you are describing.
MMO players don't want fairness. They want to level 26+ hours a day with their no-job no-life existence and trump the other guy. So--no--you want a levelling curve.
I like MMOs but it is increasingly evident that the player base does not want fairness. If they wanted things to be fair, they would be playing a MOBA...
I believe there is a middle ground; if I'm getting into a new game I want to be able to go toe to toe with players that have been around for a while if my natural aptitude is sufficient. On the other hand, I'm willing to accept that I may just be bad at some games. Player skill should factor in and yes I believe this has a place in MMORPGs. Saying it should be totally dependent on hours spent grinding is silly. I do want fairness. I'm willing to accept that on any given day a surprising newbie might hand my rear 180° to me.
There is another aspect to this: players that spend large amounts of time in game *should* be rewarded. However, these rewards should be dimensional. What I mean by this is that a player that has spent 6 months of game time should not have a jack of all trades that will always beat my jack of all trades after 7 days (solid). However, maybe this advanced player has access to an advanced build that is better than anything I have *in some respects*.
This is what I mean by dimensional rewards. I'm not theorycrafting here: I've seen a system like this work very well in the game I play.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar Authored 139 missions in VendettaOnline and 6 tracks in Distance
If you combine PvE and PvP in the same game there should always be a grind. You grind PvE in order to get better in PvP.
There are maybe 1 or 2 MMOs where the opponents in the two are even remotely similar. In the majority of the MMOs, the stats and mechanics of the two are so different that anyone trying to use the same strategies in both would be a fantastic failure in one or the other.
-- Whammy - a 64x64 miniRPG - RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right? - FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
If you combine PvE and PvP in the same game there should always be a grind. You grind PvE in order to get better in PvP.
There are maybe 1 or 2 MMOs where the opponents in the two are even remotely similar. In the majority of the MMOs, the stats and mechanics of the two are so different that anyone trying to use the same strategies in both would be a fantastic failure in one or the other.
I agree, and i think it's a huge problem. You end up having two games in one product, with two very different kind of communities. One group finds constant ganking and forced PvP annoying and disturbing, while the other group can't understand why they are forced to do PvE when PvP is the only reason they even log in.
Why even play an MMORPG if you want balanced PVP gameplay? I know I don't want that. I want my character that I have put 100s of hours into, to be outright better at everything than someone who's only been playing 10-15 hrs. When I want to play a game with a level playing field based on skill, I'll pop in an FPS, DOTA2, or an RTS
Why even play an MMORPG if you want balanced PVP gameplay? I know I don't want that. I want my character that I have put 100s of hours into, to be outright better at everything than someone who's only been playing 10-15 hrs. When I want to play a game with a level playing field based on skill, I'll pop in an FPS, DOTA2, or an RTS
But, if 10 people that have the same amount of hours in your character but added up, should have atleast a 50% chance or more to kill you. i didnt read the OP yet.
Lineage 1 still is the best open pvp MMO in the world and has open world grind. If you want only pvp right after entering the game, I recommend you Counter Strike, Call of Duty, or a MOBA like Leage of legends.
PvP MMORPGs with no grind is a redundant idea. Just go play a MOBA or whatever.
He said MMO, not MMORPGs.
Plenty of pvp MMOs have no level grind .. like World of Tanks.
This is why you don't fuck around with definitions for basic terminology; you cannot communicate with other people on any level. You just end up in meaningless boring circles. But, you've made your bed...
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Did you even read his post?
Most games do not force PVP nor PVE on you.
That's right, but imo they both should be an integral part of a gameplay in an mmorpg rather than separate entities. That's my point.
Yes, you can combine the two, but it hasn't worked all that well in the past. Given the choice, players will choose either or. Also, it is very hard to design and balance gameplay that is satisfactory for both since PvE and PvP encounters differ greatly. Designing content which takes PvP into account is also an extra mile in content design.
There's no escaping the fact that whenever you combine PvP and PvE, you will have "the wolves" (characters optimized for PvP) hunting "the sheep" (characters optimized for PvE). Ideally you'd want the sheep to be able to defend themselves adequately, but in practice it is very hard to achieve (and to my knowledge, nobody has).
This is a problem with players too. People are too ingrained to formulaic tank 'n' spank combat that something as changing as a PvP encounter is entirely foreign and chaotic to them.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Whenever a thread like this comes up there is always a lot of angst from people saying things like "go and play a moba", "must have pve", "mmorpgs have to have power based progression", "mmos have to have grind" etc.
Now I know many people like a game where you pve to get more powerful in pvp so you can kill weaker players. There are quite a few mmos that cater to that crowd, and there is nothing wrong with that type of game. However, I don't know of any mmorpg that has really tried to do what the OP is asking. The closet I can think of are GW2 WvW, WAR's RvR, and ESO's RvR, but they are/were still quite gear/level dependant games.
Personally I would love to play a game that was kind of like say ESO or WAR's RvR, but had less (or no) focus on gear/levels or pve.
I play MMORPGS because I like them, I PvP because I like that as well. Nothing needs to change except graphics and bugs. Improve graphics, and get rid of bugs.
Also, I started PvPing my first hour in Eve, there is no time requirement for PvP in that game. Just the ability to not take dying personally and learn something from every engagement.
All of your posts seem like click bait to me. Do you really need a orange/purple name that badly? If so do what the rest of the Orange names did, make good posts with good points based off fact or in most cases popular opinion.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
I think this is a huge barrier to entry for PvP focused MMOs (which are most sandbox MMOs). This came up in my, are MMOs to open/big thread, but wasn't talked about much.
Take LoL or any FPS game...there is no grind, except maybe to unlock some weapons/heroes/skins...but everyone is on even ground. You hop on and can do what anyone else can. You don't have to spend 100s or (like in EVE) thousands of hours to be able to PvP. You just hop on, PvP and have a ton of fun.
The only MMO that is like this, is Planetside. But the state of SOE is pretty iffy, especially being bought out by an investment company, so not many people want to play their games when its owned by an investment company. But, it is the closest example with what I'm talking about.
Again like I said in my other thread, if EVE 100% removed all the grind, and just had unlocks/skins or whatever...it would be FAR more of a success. This would be true for many PvP focused MMOs. Very few people want to PvP, but be forced to grind in PvE for 100s or thousands of hours to...PvP.
Take a look at GW2, as a good example of it being done right in a themepark MMO. In GW2 you can PvP any time, any level...your character gets boosted and you are just as good at PvP as anyone else. Of course, they made some mistakes and seem to not know where to go with GW2 that drove away the PvP community...but that is Arenanet's fault, not because of PvP mechanics. GW2 PvP was hugely successful because there was no grind to be able to PvP. I mean, really...what hardcore PvPer wants to be forced to PvE to do PvP?
I think this is where a lot of PvP sandbox MMOs fail and why so many sandbox PvP MMOs die a quick death. They focus so much on the grind, when they really should focus on PvP and let everyone be able to PvP without doing any grinding/crafting/PvE. GW2 let everyone PvP, and it was hugely successful until Arenanet messed up GW2
Here we go again!
1) What possible evidence do you have that EvE would be more successful in a different format?
I mean, you really are pulling this out of your butt. From all analyses I've seen, the exact opposite is true: EvEs success is built on the long grinds and it's sandbox nature. It has created a universe in which people can live for long periods of time. Removing the grinds / long term goals / progression etc would almost certainly kill it off - for evidence, just look at all the short term play session MMOs which have tanked and have low retention rates.
2) Barrier to entry
It is not the grind that is at fault, it is the power gaps. Power gaps kill PvP and it is power gaps that create the need to grind for hours to eliminate those gaps. But, there are ways around it. Different tiers, for example, are a great way to get people pvping straight away. For example, in WAR they had 4 tiers and for the first 3 the power gaps weren't too bad. A player could create an account, login and pvp at lvl1 and have fun and be able to kill people.
I do agree that power gaps should be removed from all pvp mmos (and all MMOs in general) as they are a divisive mechanic for a genre that is / should be focused on playing together.
3) Sandbox MMOs failing
Sandboxes fail due to lack of marketing, lack of accessibility and human nature (most people are sheep). Saying they fail because people don't like spending months grinding levels before they can pvp is....well, narrow minded. I'm sure that puts some people off, but doesn't address the much larger issues with sandboxes. Also, we've never had a AAA sandbox MMO
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Isnt removing the grind basically what MOBAs have done?
Yeah, but moba also remove the persistent world, character identity, scale, etc.
Pesistent world is just meaningless in current MMO landscape since we have megatons of instances and battlegrounds.
When it comes to instanced pvp, MOBA kicks the asses of themepark MMOs for offering some progression/pve/pvp inside the arena. Looks like a very small scale idea of a world pvp MMO like Lineage: you can level up while fighting an enemy group at the same time.
Level grinding is a time-sink, and nothing else. Honestly, MMO progression is a joke most of the time, go kill 10 rats... thanks, sweet, you'll be a hero soon!
If the gameplay is great, the progression grind will mean nothing. That means a great story, good raids for that group of people and good pvp.
You would be surprised how many people on these boards desire mindless grinds.
Pesistent world is just meaningless in current MMO landscape since we have megatons of instances and battlegrounds.
Most here don't understand that persistent world is no longer a hot feature in gaming. Single player open world .. may be ... but a true persistent world? Why bother when there are instances?
Comments
PS : you can't remove the grind cause even kill 2 same things count as grind .
For example when I played BG 1 and 2 I never felt like I was grinding because killing, progression and combat was part of the narrative. They were secondary.
In MMORPG progression and reward are the primary objectives. Narratives and repetition are the secondary fuel and barriers to reaching the primary objective. Even further you have the end game which is viewed as the "real game." Not to mention levels are not about increased challenge but increase in numbers(progression).
Much of the narrative and repetition are poor and overdone because people care more about the reward/progression. The more repetition the more content a developer can claim. It's a pure achievement based model. One reason why I believe the genre is niche because most gamers don't find the typical quest/task acceptable or fun.
There is another aspect to this: players that spend large amounts of time in game *should* be rewarded. However, these rewards should be dimensional. What I mean by this is that a player that has spent 6 months of game time should not have a jack of all trades that will always beat my jack of all trades after 7 days (solid). However, maybe this advanced player has access to an advanced build that is better than anything I have *in some respects*.
This is what I mean by dimensional rewards. I'm not theorycrafting here: I've seen a system like this work very well in the game I play.
"The simple is the seal of the true and beauty is the splendor of truth" -Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
Authored 139 missions in Vendetta Online and 6 tracks in Distance
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
ot solo with damn boring linear quest.
pandora saga (RIP) has it.
I play MMOs for the Forum PVP
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
There's no escaping the fact that whenever you combine PvP and PvE, you will have "the wolves" (characters optimized for PvP) hunting "the sheep" (characters optimized for PvE). Ideally you'd want the sheep to be able to defend themselves adequately, but in practice it is very hard to achieve (and to my knowledge, nobody has).
This is a problem with players too. People are too ingrained to formulaic tank 'n' spank combat that something as changing as a PvP encounter is entirely foreign and chaotic to them.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Now I know many people like a game where you pve to get more powerful in pvp so you can kill weaker players. There are quite a few mmos that cater to that crowd, and there is nothing wrong with that type of game. However, I don't know of any mmorpg that has really tried to do what the OP is asking. The closet I can think of are GW2 WvW, WAR's RvR, and ESO's RvR, but they are/were still quite gear/level dependant games.
Personally I would love to play a game that was kind of like say ESO or WAR's RvR, but had less (or no) focus on gear/levels or pve.
Also, I started PvPing my first hour in Eve, there is no time requirement for PvP in that game. Just the ability to not take dying personally and learn something from every engagement.
All of your posts seem like click bait to me. Do you really need a orange/purple name that badly? If so do what the rest of the Orange names did, make good posts with good points based off fact or in most cases popular opinion.
If you want a new idea, go read an old book.
In order to be insulted, I must first value your opinion.
1) What possible evidence do you have that EvE would be more successful in a different format?
I mean, you really are pulling this out of your butt. From all analyses I've seen, the exact opposite is true: EvEs success is built on the long grinds and it's sandbox nature. It has created a universe in which people can live for long periods of time. Removing the grinds / long term goals / progression etc would almost certainly kill it off - for evidence, just look at all the short term play session MMOs which have tanked and have low retention rates.
2) Barrier to entry
It is not the grind that is at fault, it is the power gaps. Power gaps kill PvP and it is power gaps that create the need to grind for hours to eliminate those gaps. But, there are ways around it. Different tiers, for example, are a great way to get people pvping straight away. For example, in WAR they had 4 tiers and for the first 3 the power gaps weren't too bad. A player could create an account, login and pvp at lvl1 and have fun and be able to kill people.
I do agree that power gaps should be removed from all pvp mmos (and all MMOs in general) as they are a divisive mechanic for a genre that is / should be focused on playing together.
3) Sandbox MMOs failing
Sandboxes fail due to lack of marketing, lack of accessibility and human nature (most people are sheep). Saying they fail because people don't like spending months grinding levels before they can pvp is....well, narrow minded. I'm sure that puts some people off, but doesn't address the much larger issues with sandboxes. Also, we've never had a AAA sandbox MMO
When it comes to instanced pvp, MOBA kicks the asses of themepark MMOs for offering some progression/pve/pvp inside the arena. Looks like a very small scale idea of a world pvp MMO like Lineage: you can level up while fighting an enemy group at the same time.