Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

General: Debate: The End-Game

2

Comments

  • janthinjanthin Member Posts: 11
    I fully understand why games eventually become boring. No game company can provide infinite content, or infinite progression, or infinite anything.

    Do we really expect any game to last forever? I don't think we do. All we really want is for it to last until the next game comes out. The problem is that creating these games is far from easy. It is not a science, either, it is an art form, and most attempts fail pretty badly.

    So what actually happens to us, as gamers, is that we play a game, get to the "end" (meaning we've reached the highest level, done pretty much everything there is to do, and seen pretty much all there is to see) and then we look around and there is no other game that's calling us. So we stay, bored, but with nothing else really out there we want to do.

    This is the point I am at in WoW now, and which I reached previously in Everquest. I've had multiple characters, experienced all the zones, done a lot of PvP, and now there's really nothing in particular to do game-wise.

    The devs have done a herculean task to put together a game that can hold my attention so long, really. I've lived in these worlds. I've experienced an alternate reality, in a way, and it's fun, really fun.

    Personally I can still get some additional mileage out of a game when I've reached the end, if I am in a Roleplaying community. Creating our own storylines, defining our own events, participating in player-created content -- this keeps the game fun for a while.

    The problem is that we, as players, are not given many tools for creating such content for ourselves. If we had the tools, we could create nearly endless content!

    You want a game that provides long-running 'end-game' content? Make one that provides the tools for the players themselves to generate content -- let us design raids, and PvP events, and parties, and on and on... and we will. Sure some of it will suck, but some of it will be magnificent, and it will keep us entertained as we work on it.


  • LustmordLustmord Member UncommonPosts: 1,114

    The fact is that we're going to continue to have the endgame mudflation until a great game comes out and implements a working perma-death system.

    IMO, an MMO should be about living and dying in a persistant world..

    Skill Gains should be fast, but Life should be short.

    The endgame shouldn't be to lvl up the treadmill to God-Like Status.. But instead to exist in a ever-changing world, build a house, and *hopefully* die of old age.

    I really like Age of Mourning's bloodline system.. It makes perfect sense for an MMO.

  • SpiritofGameSpiritofGame Member UncommonPosts: 1,332

    It may be something as simple as the original design document not containing explicit information concerning the direction the "end-game" (which I still prefer to call the "high-level" game) should go.

    One example is DAoC where the end-game content was carefully thought out.  First would be primarily a PvE experience (this has been changed so that leveling up can be done through PvP BGs now) to reach max level 50 -- at which time the primary focus would become a second "ladder" of progression to acquire Realm Ranks.  This was excellent in that it gave meaning and direction to the end-game.

    I believe the eventual failure of DAoC's end-game was due to the fact that they expanded the PvE and RPG portions of the game immensely while not expanding (however, they did one "consolidation" of the Frontiers) the high-level, end-game RvR aspects to include 1) a higher max level cap for players 2) expanding the "frontiers" into entirely new areas and 3) the ultimate end-game of allowing the frontier gates to be broken and hordes of enemies allowed to enter the realms (interestingly enough, Warhammer Online -- which I like to call DAoC 2 -- will, in fact, allow realm pillaging).

    Then, when you take an immensely popular but ultimately disappointing game like WoW and see that its greatest flaw (aside from cartoony artwork) is that catering to the "casual" player simply makes for an incredibly dull MMORPG-on-training-wheels concept that holds your hand every step of the way to a very anti-climactic "Ding!" of level 60 -- beyond which stretches a boring wasteland of repetitious dungeon raids and meaningless PvP.  Even early beta tester comments noted that WoW had NO end-game, a fact which has not changed since it seems there was no end-game in the original design documents (except for a vague "we will do expansions at some point" philosophy).

    (And, since we all know that eventually all games come to their creative ends, imagine that someday MMORPGs that wish to spin off a sequel will actually destroy their old games with something similar to an "End-of-Beta-type Catastrophe and World Destruction" event to coincide with the opening of the sequel with longevity/loyalty bonuses for players carrying their accounts over to the new game, which would start a brand-new storyline -- NOT of course that any game developer would ever pull the plug on its cash-cow until that cow is milked dry.)

    ~ Ancient Membership ~

  • JimLadJimLad Member CommonPosts: 187

    The idea of 'end game content' is a load of bollocks imo.
    The whole game should be 'end game' technically. Instead devs know that it will be sub par, so they stick a million obsticles in the players way to prolong the inevitable.
    But that's just me being a little old fashioned by thinking PvP is the only true nature of games. Anything else and it may as well be an offline game.

    It all depends on if you're a role player or a PvPer, role players aint gonna mind what kind of play mechanics the game employs or how things work. So long as they can play a role in a virtual world by simulating travel, exploration, economy, and 'fights' with npcs or mobs then all that matters is the production values and how much new content the devs add.

    PvPers however have to troll through loads of levels and make sure they have the very best and rarest loot just to get to 'the good stuff'. In the end the fighting itself is pretty restricting with auto targeting and dice role damage, so success usually depends on which side has the biggest zerg.
    Adding content is fine, but when it's done purely to keep you from the actual 'higher tier' fighting, the whole thing just becomes tedious.

    Make a game with proper skill based combat, where everyone is on a level playing field. Where all weapons, armours and items are easy to get from crafters via a player driven economy. Make the pvp have a point, like the control of land, control of resources, battle ranks, kill counts, guild standing. Just make a game based on those grounds and you wont need 'end game content' because what you see is what you get and the players can make their own rules. Then you can use updates and patches to add more features and maps instead of more rare items that are required to win.

  • paulscottpaulscott Member Posts: 5,613

    wurmonline would be a good referance for most of the peps here if you wanna make a game

    basically there is basically no end game.  if only it was more fun. :(

    I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.

  • AnofalyeAnofalye Member, Newbie CommonPosts: 7,433

    Zzzz

    Both options are not acceptable IMO.

    Nice story and everything, why get nice story only at the END?  I mean, if there was no story up to that point, do you believe the player suddenly awaken in a need of a story?  I like stories, but from the start, not after a point.

    The other debater is happy to enforce a new gameplay on players who reach a point by playing another game, which is plainly mistaken.

    End Games should be similar to what bring you there, putting a completely different game and denying players of the "end" unless they adapt to this completely new game is not only rude, it is unfair, harsh and demotivating.

    PvP and Raiding should start from level 1 to the end game or never be part of the design.  PvP or Raiding at level 50+ only is mistaken.  I am sick of the "reach that point and then start a new game".  Start that new game right away or be done with it, if it cannot evolves on it own, it mean that players don't want it.

    Having a End Game which is similar to the game you play is fine, having PvP or Raiding at the end of a PvE solo/grouping is plainly lame.

    - "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren

  • nthnaounnthnaoun Member Posts: 1,438

    Garrett is narrow minded if he thinks there must be competition or an end-game in an mmo. Garrett used many generalizations that were not a product of an expert writer, which one should be if your going to write columns and such.

    I am not part of the everyone or everybody that he was referring to when he said we want competition in all its forms in an MMO. There doesn't need to be an end-game. All you need is constant content patches and level increases to keep the game going.

    So...what about the hardcore gamers who play all the time? Well if all MMO's adopted the constant content and level increase patches then people would be forced to have a life and to get off the computer. So you win both ways. You get a healthier lifestyle, since you won't be glued to your computer 24 hours a day and you get a game that has a constant story and levels.

    If you have to have an end, you could always make characters retire at age/level 100. You could add them to a special board on the games website to give them special recognition. Then you could reroll or find another game.

  • tdeluztdeluz Member Posts: 3

    When I think of the term end-game I think back to The X-Files many season finalies and ultimately the series finaliem where mostly all episodic content was explained and the viewer was rewarded with the ultimate charracter development - Mulder and Scully.  With that being said, end-game refers to the big-picture, the ultimate agenda which unfolds once the tedious grind has been completed.  In my experience, games like WoW, whose Warcraft franchise is all about the ultimate agenda, never fully develops an engaging end-game experience.  You have to do more of what you did to get you to the end-game except you have to do it with other players.  Why can't the end-game open a new realm where "Epic" players transport to.  Based on the successes and failures of various quests undertaken in the pre-epic content area, players with similar game histories "live" in their own version of the end-game.  If you don't get that uber item you would origionally farm a boss for, in the end-game realm you are promoted and presented with the best set for your class/race/type etc.  As a hero in the end-game, you can do everything you have come to know in the pre-end game content, but now you can command a legion of npc's which you can level (like a true RPG), and combat the biggest and baddest bosses in the game, i.e. the ones that are causing the need for your existance in-game in the first place.  Once they're gone they stay gone and the remaining bosses become stronger by filling the power void.

    Well, that's just a suggestion, but the point is that the end-game should open up a level of gameplay that culminates in a unique exerpience while engaging in the ultimate conflict.

  • GikkuGikku Member Posts: 208


    Originally posted by dadown


    I agree, if the focus is on the 'end game' instead of the journey, its like reading a book summary and jumping to the last chapter, only to be disappointed when its over so soon.  One of the great things about Asheron's Call is that it took a whole year before players started reaching the maximum level.  In WoW, there was a level 60 in the first month after release!

    I never rush to get to the max level.  'Grinding' not only takes the fun out of the journey, you also miss out on some of the most interesting parts.


    I don't rush to get to the end game either. I try not to miss things and I go back and do things I have. I have serveral different chars of diff classes and enjoy the game.
    I played EQ and got to the end game not completely but enough to know I did not like the constant grind and rush . I like to be able to solo and join a group when I need help. Meet peeps and enjoy the game. The end-game takes the fun out of it and once you reach max lvl what then. I don't care for pvp and don't have time to get into big raids. I did when I played EQ and got burned out on the "end-game" and "grind".

    Gikku

  • treed0223treed0223 Member Posts: 84
    In order for there to be no "endgame" the leveling system must be completely changed (I.E. a skill system???).  Going up levels is fun, but eventually it leads to a finite destination.  This is a set limit on something that is supposed to be infinite.
  • Dem3triusDem3trius Member UncommonPosts: 20
    I realy think that the main problem is that "end game" is the goal.  I feel as though there shouldnt be an end game, a game should be balanced such that people can continue to progress.  The way I see it, the hit points system is the main cause of this.  In almost every game as a player gains levels, he or she gains hitpoints or stat increases.  Not only is this compleatly unrealistic but it makes the game compleatly unbalanced, lower level players have no chance in a competition with higher level players.  I think that levels should not give players hit points, rather it should only give them new skills and new equipment.  This would make it so that rather then a game being compleatly reliant on someones level, it would also be determined by their skill as a player.  For example in the real world, an extreamly skilled carpenter could make great things with only a few tools, while someone who is not so skilled my have a large assortment of tools availible to them, however they can not use them nearly as effectivly.  This would make it so that players who spent more time in the game would have an advantage, by having more skills or "tools" avalible to them, but a casual player who happens to be very good at the game could still defeat them.  With a system like this, players could continue to progress without compleatly unbalancing the game, large scale raids, or hudge PvP battles could be done with people from a much larger spectrum of levels.  Making it not "end game' content, but simply content.
  • sakersaker Member RarePosts: 1,458


    Originally posted by Amaranthar
    These are supposed to be persistent worlds. Designing one with a play style that brings you to an "end game" is the first mistake.

    I agree completely! These need to be designed as worlds not games, I also believe specifically you need to get away from class and level based world design, people want more open worlds skill based people, skill based.
  • KzakKzak Member Posts: 22

    I enjoy leveling and questing.  Too bad in Wow it stops at 60.  As such I start new characters, but the questing eventually gets repetitious.  I look forward to the Wow expansion raising the level cap to 70 while adding a new continent to explore.  It would be nice if the level cap was raised to 80, 90, 100, etc.  I will probably stop playing Wow soon and wait for the expansion.

  • spankybusspankybus Member UncommonPosts: 1,367
    imho, there hasn't been a real, honest to god, persistent world since Ultima Online. There was just tons and tons of things to do, and most of it, arguablly quite useless from a current gen standpoint of mmorpgs, but i loved it anyways. The had checkers for pete's sake, dye tubs for your clothes..you could literally spend hours screing off with things that had nothing to do with combat (or cxrafting for that matter). Many people would find this boring...so we now have a lot of mmo's that of combat/crafting centric with very little 'fluff'. isn't it the fluff that really gets to the feeling of being there? the mondane details and activities that you'd do if you were really living in that world? I know lots of folks don't want this kind of game...they wanna bash some bunnies and then go to bed so they can go to work in the morning. Some games now have some aspects of this concept, but no where near the extent that UP did, though they do look better...maybe it's that gameplay options versus graphics debate that is inevitable that will touch on this.

    Why do i always pick on WOW? hmm, Honestly, it's a shell of a mmo, it's about as souless a game as I can imagine. Empty stories. Nothing i do in the world seems to matter at all to that world, even in the slightest. It is a game seemingly built around one vain concept...'Make me UBER'.. I loved all the warcraft series up to this point. They had nothing to do with that crap, it was all about war! That concept seems to have been tossed in the interested of not hurting anyones feelings (which tends to happen in War).

    However, a lot, and i mean a LOT of people play this game, maybe because it's so simple and that's exactly what all these people playing it were waiting for, an mmo that didn't require you to write off your friends and quit your job. So, why di I pick on it? Because very successful games have a habit of getting reincarnated in clones...New MMORPGs will try to copy this 'Keep it simple, stupid' formula, taken to the next level,  and next thing we know, we'll all be chillin round here remambering hte heydays of really 'deep' games like World of Warcraft...To the people who crave simplistic, go play Final Fantasy ( a great series) where the gameplay is so linear, you can almost just sit back and watch it happen without ever having to think


    Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone
    www.spankybus.com
    -3d Artist & Compositor
    -Writer
    -Professional Amature

  • subbobsubbob Member Posts: 36

    So many thoughts on this subject.  From the beginning, I abhor the term and concept of an end-game in a MMORPG.  Emphasis on the RPG part.

    I'm a RP at heart.  I don't care where the end is - I don't want an end.  I just want a persistent world that allows me to create & develop my character, create content and interact with others.

    Problem is that the common denominator in our society do not - or can not - appreciate such a game. A game with open-ended mechanics, open content and that appeals to roleplayers will NOT be a mass-market game.  However, if a company is willing to fill that niche, they could count on a small population for a LONG time.

    For the first couple years, SWG allowed me to do that very well.  I had a unique character, a well known persona, a thriving business and even a dynamic living city.  I didn't play to master a profession, I played to BE that person in the Star Wars environment.

    Then they started to screw with the system and take away the things that allowed it to be an open system. 

  • YamotaYamota Member UncommonPosts: 6,593

    I think the problem with current MMORPGs is that there is even something called "end-game" because MMORPGs should be definition not end as it is a persistant on going world.

    Instead developers should focus on making the world an exiting place to take part in at all stages of their character lives and as in real life there should always be room for evolvment of your character.

    PvP or boss raids should not be limited to the people who hit some kind of artificial level/skill cap and instead be something that could be done if the people involved have the skills, organisation and levels(yes your characters level shouldnt be irrelevant) to pull it of.

    I think the first mmorpg developers had this in mind. Games like UO and Asherons Call were very open ended and the content was not limited for people at the "cap". But these days mmorpgs seem to act very much like single player games. That is to play the game from start to end and then do the "end game" content. And that I think is bad for mmorpgs in general as the idea of mmorpgs should be that you "live" in a open ended world of possibilities and not a level game where you go from lvl 1 - XX and then start over because there is no end game content left.

    The problem is that the MMORPG crowd these days have no patience. They want it all and they want it quick and that has lead the devs to create MMORGPs that do just that. And the problem with that kind of thinking that it will always suffer from end game issues because sooner or later the end game content will run out.

    Instead the devs should design a game where the evolvement of your character and the world in itself should be exciting and the level cap should be really, Really high so that you feel that your character really lives in a world and not a leveling game.

  • craynloncraynlon Member Posts: 255

    i would like a game where your character actually ages and at some time dies a natural death.

    this combined with the ability to further you own lineage/ house over generations would be a truly fresh going against all these expansions that just raise the level cap to make you able to continue the grind.

    also i agree on the demand that the world should be changing by the powers (players) theat influence it. pvp, generation-concepts, shifting frontiers in a non instanciated world would be my kind of game.

    many things i heared about warhammer makes me believe it will be a really interesting fresh new game. 

    if your bored, visit my blog at:
    http://craylon.wordpress.com/ dealing with the look of mmos with the nvidia 3d vision glasses

  • ZoayZoay Member Posts: 24


    Originally posted by shmig

    The fact is, in WoW, a 40 vs. 40 alterac valley battleground IS an epic battle. As i never really stuck around long enough to do the big RvR battles in DAOC, these battles are the largest pvp excursions i've ever done. The advantage is that you're fighting real people, which means there's not reason to believe it'll be the same battle every time as one might expect from a traditional rpg.


    That's not true, Alterac Valley, fighting different people each time or not, always end up the same way..
    Endless hours of zerg, zerg zerg zerg.. And also, in the end the biggest problem with winning
    Alterac Valley is to beat the other factions boss, which is a NPC that requires pretty much all 40
    players to get him down (unless it's a guild playing together, of course that works better than a
    bunch of random people). So in the end Alterac Valley is about beating on npc's, just like in Molten Core or whichever instance.

    ~~ The one and only from the sundsvall elite ~~

  • ZoayZoay Member Posts: 24


    Tibia, an old MMORPG that I played almost from the first days of it,
    has 3 things which you all seem to crave for..
    1. no level cap, at all.
    2. Skill advancement system, you have to stand ingame and "train" to get your skills in swords etc.
    up (afaik Ultima Online is like that aswell, but I never played it so I can't really say)
    3. a lvl 150 character can get beaten by a lvl 100 character, because the lvl 100 character
    might have focused more on the skill advancement, and also the skills of the player matter alot,
    thus making it pretty balanced so that even if someone spent 200 hours more than you lvling,
    if he sucks at playing you will still beat him :P

    On the other hand, the graphics really sucks, and these days the company making the game
    hires corrupt GM's that ban you for attacking them and such, lol. (This was not the case when
    I played it a few years ago though)

    So yeah, those kinds of games do exist, and they still drag quite alot of ppl to play them..
    So why don't we see more games like them getting made?

    ~~ The one and only from the sundsvall elite ~~

  • cheggelundcheggelund Member UncommonPosts: 91

    Seems to me that in MMO terms endgame means to provide content to those who have reached the level cap in a particular game.


     

    IMHO the end game content should be a good reflection of what you have done so far in the game, which is why I think WoW failed miserably in that regard. WoW is a very ‘Casual gamer’ friendly game from lvl 1-59. However, when you hit lvl 60 WoW turns into 40 man raids or PvP that requires ‘phat loot’. So this whole time in WoW I had a great time being able to solo most content and play 1 hour here and there. At lvl 60 I suddenly need to invest 3+ hours at a time in order to really experience the lvl 60 content.


     

    I don’t think that being ‘casual gamer’ friendly is a bad thing in a game, and that isn’t mutually exclusive to not being an immersive game. For a well designed game you can (and should) have both.


     

    Looking forward to seeing how TCoS and Age of Conan will handle this :)


     

    -Chegg

  • ArrunArrun Member Posts: 12
    "Whoever invented faction grinding should please get out of this business before someone shoots you, I fear for your life, mate."


    This is the quote to end all quotes right here :P

    Don't get me wrong, I like the epic raids, but my biggest complaint about WoW is that nothing you do has any lasting immpresion on the world.  The PvP is nothing more then a rep grind.  The new system they have put in for ZG and AQ to grind rep and then get quest items to get class sets are horrible. 

    Where the hell is the WAR in warcraft?


  • GFullsGFulls Member Posts: 478

    [So...what about the hardcore gamers who play all the time? Well if all MMO's adopted the constant content and level increase patches then people would be forced to have a life and to get off the computer. So you win both ways. You get a healthier lifestyle, since you won't be glued to your computer 24 hours a day and you get a game that has a constant story and levels.]

    Nthnaoun - How does having constant content and level increases force people to get off the computer? If games continuously raised their levels then players would constantly work on getting those levels. Your entire statement makes NO sense.

  • DaRKieWuRMDaRKieWuRM Member Posts: 1

    End-Game content is impossible to
    achieve really. All games have a inevitable end, much like the real
    world tbh. One could see everything there is to see in the real world
    to you know. You could have killed all there is to kill done every
    professions there is to do so on a so forth. So really all you can do
    is prolong the inevitable... The problem is there is no real game out
    there that can adequately prolong the inevitable in a way that makes
    any sense. Levels never really made any sense, but this is tied to
    the old pen and paper way of roleplaying. It's a means to limit what
    content is available to a given player based on the players
    investment into the game. Its a reward system nothing more.

    What
    you gain over time, all can agree, must give you some kind of
    advantage, sooner or later you will find that all of the things you
    acquire will make you at the best you can be. So then what? Raise the
    levels 100... 150....? sooner or later you'll get there and then
    what.... Meantime new commers to the game will see people running
    around at level 250 and wonder how long its going to take them to get
    there and often quit preferring not to play catchup tbh. So theres no
    real good solution that I can see, its a fact of MMO's that they have
    a end because they have to based on fairness to all parties
    concerned.

    The question isn't if you decide to leave your
    favorite game, but more a matter of when. Most will burn out the game
    ad-naseum till they find something else that tickles their fancy.
    Such is the life of a mmo player. Most who complain about end-game
    content have simply burned the game to its end, frankly as expected.
    There are games out there that have a long shelf life in terms of end
    game, but they are far and few between.

    -dw

  • franksalbefranksalbe Member Posts: 228
    I agree the real persistent world has not endgame and a virtual persistent game should be the same. Give me more ability to create my own content rather then repeat the same old thing.

    Faranthil Tanathalos
    EverQuest 1 - Ranger
    Star Wars Galaxies - Master Ranger
    Everquest2 - Ranger WarhammerOnline - Shadow Warrior
    WOW - Hunter

    That's right I like bows and arrows.

  • NahcNikNahcNik Member Posts: 1

    The end-game...what it boils down to is that there are different schools of thought on what is "fun" end-game content.  Some folks think the end-game should be raids to get loot to raid more to get loot to raid more, etc.  Jeff "Tigole" Kaplan, the WoW designer & former leader of the EQ1 Legacy of Steel uberguild is clearly of that philosophy.  Then there are those who think the end-game should involve PvP of some sort.  And there's the school of thought that there should be no end-game, per se, just an open-ended continuum of advancement.

    People who have different notions of what's fun will favor one kind of end-game content over another because of their own preferences.  There is no such thing as a one-type-fits-all end-game for everybody.  Arguing over this is, in a sense, as pointless are arguing over favorite colors.  There are games out there that suit a range of different tastes as far as end-game content.  Just play the one that suits you best.
Sign In or Register to comment.