IMO, levelling should teach you how to play your character and the various systems of the game. Too many now rush you to the end and the player is still pretty clueless when they get there.
I saw in chat in City of Heroes just yesterday from a guy looking for a guild (supergroup) since he was now level 50 and had just started that day. The first thought through my head was "I sure don't want to group with that guy much less have him in my guild." Perhaps it was a bit harsh but there's no way he could really understand his character yet even if he did a lot of research prior to logging in. Now he's at the end and likely needs to be taught the basics as many of those systems are still relevant.
Greg could not be more wrong. If we're talking about an MMO where the endgame is meant to be where the player spends the vast majority of their time, then leveling should not exist at all.
Maybe we don’t have an end game?
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
If a game has no leveling I have no desire to play it at all. The whole idea of living in a world and going to different places and experiencing it like in Everquest is the main reason I play. How can you form any attachment to a game or the character without it.
If a game has no leveling I have no desire to play it at all. The whole idea of living in a world and going to different places and experiencing it like in Everquest is the main reason I play. How can you form any attachment to a game or the character without it.
I have an issue with this myself, I was sold on "horizontal progression" for a while because it makes grouping easier. But there is no evidence that games without levelling have more grouping so I see no advantages just disadvantages.
If a game has no leveling I have no desire to play it at all. The whole idea of living in a world and going to different places and experiencing it like in Everquest is the main reason I play. How can you form any attachment to a game or the character without it.
Agree 100%...The journey is why I play most games...Games like Fortnite where you dont advance your character with levels and skills just doesnt appeal to me...."end game" to me often means "end (of the) game"
If a game has no leveling I have no desire to play it at all. The whole idea of living in a world and going to different places and experiencing it like in Everquest is the main reason I play. How can you form any attachment to a game or the character without it.
I have an issue with this myself, I was sold on "horizontal progression" for a while because it makes grouping easier. But there is no evidence that games without levelling have more grouping so I see no advantages just disadvantages.
I don't think we've ever had an MMORPG built around horizontal progression, so there is only theory right now.
The FPS world might be able to provide some examples, as there is a healthy mix of horizontal and vertical progression games. However, im not into FPS myself, so wouldn't really know where to point to!
As to cheyane's comment:
This is a common mis-understanding about horizontal progression. You would still have all the other RPG features - the world, the quests, the story, the roles, the economy etc - the only difference is the way progression is handled. But there is still progression, you would still unlock new things, there would still be that carrot driving you forwards. It's just a different type of carrot (more options) compared to the usual (more power).
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Everquest 2 had both horizontal (AA) and vertical progression. You could allocate your experience where you wanted.
I think vertical progression and a world designed along that axis has clear demarcations or areas you can get to. You can go to places above your level and die but you can see them and that was exciting to me.
When you have horizontal progression like AA or alternate achievement you have other areas of your character that become stronger. Of course this went on to further grinds in Everquest 2 because without putting points in key areas of AA you weren't good enough to handle the content be it raiding, group content or soloing.
I think horizontal progression is just another form of levelling but just focusing on talents or making your character stronger and disguising that as horizontal. No numbers with a level but you are still doing what the vertical progression does which is making your character stronger by reaching a threshold that increases the abilities, skills, advances of your character. It is not as exciting though because you cannot actually see the places you cannot go to as it is not indicated. I find that bland. I like both progressions to exist together but just horizontal is boring and not good enough to get my blood pumping when I am running through Kithicor with a level 6 halfling.
Show me exactly what you put in a horizontal progression that is so different from vertical. Does it involve giving your character options, power, skills, abilities, access, money or any advantage. Can't that be done vertically too?
The point is this, people do not actually look at what vertical progression does. They just assume it is just your level. However vertical can include all those things that horizontal does but affixes those advances to a number. Horizontal gives you progress but without the bells and whistles and I love bells and whistles ladies and gentleman.
Mabinogi has 'levels', but is really AP gathering. It has it's issues, but still holds up well as a unique game with okay progression. It takes time, but it's still natural. 100 levels/AP a week isn't the best, but it's enough for a casual to always grow in some form or way.
While there's a lot of formerly meaningful content that's being wasted, some of it's still playable enough, such as "Hard Mode" for certain dungeons. It's an issue for many reasons, but there's enough solo and group content as a result. It's impossible to have balance, but having options alleviates some of it.
There are things that the old fossil could teach. It might have the concept for the best 'leveling' system, something that new MMOs should try to experiment with.
Sure, Runescape has similar systems, but it still has a much worse archaic grind overall.
Outside of that, in other games, levels is just a stupid gate. Classics like Ragnarok Online treat it as a throw-away because a new advancement/time gate is tied to it.
What's the point of levels if it ends up being a matter of gear and stat allocation?
Some games tie leveling in to the story, but that also pushes you into the 'endgame' point faster, but without any freedom. Elsword, as one good example.
But then, what is endgame? It's just people hitting level caps and grinding for gear. That's almost the entirety of 'endgame'. In PSO2NGS, it's affix grinding or meseta grinding for fashion/affixes. It doesn't really respect the player's time, but compared to other games, it functions perfect for today's casuals -and- doesn't require you to be glued to the game 24/7.
Which is then the other problem. Time. Why do people want to be stuck playing one game forever, as if it were a job? It doesn't make sense for a game to have so much 'content' that ends up outdated instead of updated.
It should be okay to have the game end, and it should also be okay for a game to end for the month/year/date.
=================
The other problem is 'accomplishment'.
Why is killing a bunch of trash mobs for XP that devs put at an arbitrarily high values? You need 2B exp to level from 199 to 200! Yay!
Level capping was NEVER an accomplishment. It's something we all decided as teenagers in our respective game/community, because ooooh, big number.
Just like eSports isn't a real sport; developers decide the rules. They can alter the balance of the game at will. Characters can be nerfed without needing player input.
You put in 2 hours to grind 2% exp, for what? 50 hours later, then what? A community pat on the back?
It's not like most games have deep combat systems, either. It's usually just tab target and clicking. Using skills at certain times isn't exactly skill. Dodging is really just clicking to get out of a zone, either by an animation tell or a graphed tell.
MMOs were at a peak in the 2000's because of the escapism and the slow erosion of reality. It was a time where things were affordable. Each year past 2010 was slowly leading up to the present where time is much more important because time is money, and if you get sick, you may end up homeless.
People wanted to live in fantasies, so the grind was fine; they worked to their magical number in the world they wanted to live in. But now, that bubble needs to burst. MMOs are a dying breed because there's no real point in progression, nor are there many fantastical worlds that exist.
It's how Genshin and Mihoyo's other crap captured so many weebs, giving 'unique' worlds, even if the gameplay grew to be mediocre and unchanging. HSR will only have more stat checks, and as a turn-based game with basic controls, it will never be anything more than grind so you can hit higher numbers.
Those games operate on the previously established MMO logic. Yet, their success, despite having the same fundamentals, exist because there's more to a game than just levels.
There are also other important factors. Subscription MMOs.
Can you imagine paying to level at a rate of mediocre %'s per hour?
MMOs are in a hard place because they basically don't exist outside some generic big names. One factor, major or minor, is the fact all data exists just to be deleted; it shows that the game wasn't just made to be a game, but a money printer.
Shut up and buy your 2X/50% EXP boosters that conveniently stack with our 1-week 2X exp boost event.
EVE Online has no levels. There's plenty of grouping.
I'd argue that EVE has non-traditional or even horizontal leveling. It's fairly easy to get to "endgame" frigate or destroyer hulls (faction, type 2 or 3) but even still there's content for your standard hulls.
The brilliance of EVE's power curve is that there's content for most hull classes so it's pretty easy to find a group to play with.
But then, what is endgame? It's just people hitting level caps and grinding for gear. That's almost the entirety of 'endgame'. In PSO2NGS, it's affix grinding or meseta grinding for fashion/affixes. It doesn't really respect the player's time, but compared to other games, it functions perfect for today's casuals -and- doesn't require you to be glued to the game 24/7.
If that was all there was to endgame it wouldn't be as much of a focus as it is. The attraction is the content that opens up once you reach endgame. Often that content requires tuned stats and at least a basic understanding how your abilities synergize. That's where the gear grind comes into play for many games.
Show me exactly what you put in a horizontal progression that is so different from vertical. Does it involve giving your character options, power, skills, abilities, access, money or any advantage. Can't that be done vertically too?
When I talk about horizontal progression, I am talking exclusively about intrinsic character progression. By that, i mean progression specifically attached to your character, not stuff that can be traded (like money, or gear if its not bound).
The fundamental difference is between "AND" and "OR". (boolean logic stuff)
With vertical progression, everything is added to your character. Every step of progression gets added to your character on top of whatever you already had.
With horizontal progression, every step of progression is a new option, a new choice. If you choose that new option, you have to drop something you already have. This is the way that you keep "power" roughly the same, whilst still giving players something to reach for.
The whole point of horizontal progression is to keep character power roughly the same between characters. By doing so, players should find it much easier to play together, regardless of how long they've been playing the game.
Additional advantages to horizontal progression are that content remains relevant (you cant outlevel zones for example), players are given much greater choices about gameplay and builds (so its easier to find a playstyle for yourself, increasing retention), expansions dont immediately wipe out previous progress (because your hard earned gear is still relevant), and PvP is greatly improved (something nearly every mmo fails to make work).
Can this be done using vertical progression? No. The fundamental nature of vertical progression is to segregate the playerbase into different power levels, making grouping up either pointless or impossible.
That said, there are obviously problems with horizontal progression, as there are with any mechanics. The big ones are:
1) Balance - with so many more options compared to vertical, it's a pain in the ass to balance properly.
2) Player motivation - the playerbase is addicted to seeing numbers getting bigger, so it might be hard to get them motivated to progress in a different manner. However, the FPS world has shown us that it shouldn't be an issue.
3) Content design - on the PvE side, designing long linear quest chains will segregate teh playerbase just as much as vertical progression, so you need to be careful with design. Likewise, designing content that favours certain builds over others can be tricky. For solo content, you want this as a way to encourage people to unlock new options, but for multiplayer content you need to ensure that newbies aren't completely shut out because they lack the right builds.
4) Bloat - adding new options for players is great....as long as those choices are meaningful. If there is basically no difference between choices, then its just bloat. This isn't exclusive to horizontal, all MMOs suffer from bloat in this regard, but its a bigger risk with horizontal.
As always, when designing a game, you need to choose mechanics that suit what you want to achieve with that game.
Vertical progression is well suited to delivering a power fantasy, and works well with linear games, single player games and coop games.
Horizontal progression is better suited to games that focus on multiplayer, especially asynchronous multiplayer (i.e. not coop). In theory, this should mean every MMORPG, but we all know that very few MMOs care about multiplayer.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
With levelling down and other forms of assist in progression that they have in Everquest 2 you could play with anyone at any level. Let's face it you are suggesting keeping everyone at around the same progression phase. That sounds truly boring to me.
Attaching progression as you suggested to only your character that is not dependent on gear is exactly what alternative advancement was in Everquest 2. You can have levels and horizontal progression existing in the same game like they have done in other games.
When you basically stagnate or cause a character to remain around everyone else it does not give players any satisfaction of gaining anything because they are unable to compare themselves to others. Yes people enjoy seeing themselves advancing and comparing themselves to others. It's a natural thing to do.
Actually if you look at the very slow levelling in Dungeons and Dragons Online and when you finally get to 20 you go on to continuously improving your character it is similar to what you are suggesting albeit after you have levelled to level 20.
I do not think vertical and horizontal leveling is different at all aside from not seeing the obvious indications in one over the other.
EVE Online has no levels. There's plenty of grouping.
I'd argue that EVE has non-traditional or even horizontal leveling. It's fairly easy to get to "endgame" frigate or destroyer hulls (faction, type 2 or 3) but even still there's content for your standard hulls.
The brilliance of EVE's power curve is that there's content for most hull classes so it's pretty easy to find a group to play with.
All I remember when I tried it was everyone wanting to kill each other...i dont remember alot of "LFG" in chat...Im guessing all the grouping is same corp only?
Read after the first three posts where he explains about Epic Boons.
I had a read of both, and AA looks like pure vertical progression. I couldn't see anything to indicate it might be horizontal.
It's really hard to explain horizontal properly because, to my knowledge, nobody has ever designed an RPG built around horizontal. Certainly no MMORPG is built around horizontal. Dungeons and Dragons (table top) set the mould of vertical, and we've been stuck with it ever since.
The best example I can probably give is something like CoD. Im not a fan of FPS's, generally only played them with my brother (before he got mnd anyway :S).
When I played CoD, you gained XP from kills/games. You leveled up. You unlocked new guns and new modifications. However, virtually everything you unlocked was roughly the same power as what you already had access to. Some guns would have faster fire rate, but worse accuracy. Some would have higher damage, but slower fire rate, or small magazines.
The result was that everyone had "roughly" the same power level. This created balance, of a sort, along the rock-paper-scissors reasoning. Leveling up didn't make you more powerful, it just unlocked more options, more ways to customise your gear and find whats right for you, right for your playstyle, and suited to the map.
FPSs don't struggle motivating people to level up and unlock stuff, even if it won't make the players more powerful. Thats what im looking for in an RPG - still tons of stuff to unlock, still loads more options. You just won't be more powerful.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Comments
I saw in chat in City of Heroes just yesterday from a guy looking for a guild (supergroup) since he was now level 50 and had just started that day. The first thought through my head was "I sure don't want to group with that guy much less have him in my guild." Perhaps it was a bit harsh but there's no way he could really understand his character yet even if he did a lot of research prior to logging in. Now he's at the end and likely needs to be taught the basics as many of those systems are still relevant.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Agree 100%...The journey is why I play most games...Games like Fortnite where you dont advance your character with levels and skills just doesnt appeal to me...."end game" to me often means "end (of the) game"
I think vertical progression and a world designed along that axis has clear demarcations or areas you can get to. You can go to places above your level and die but you can see them and that was exciting to me.
When you have horizontal progression like AA or alternate achievement you have other areas of your character that become stronger. Of course this went on to further grinds in Everquest 2 because without putting points in key areas of AA you weren't good enough to handle the content be it raiding, group content or soloing.
I think horizontal progression is just another form of levelling but just focusing on talents or making your character stronger and disguising that as horizontal. No numbers with a level but you are still doing what the vertical progression does which is making your character stronger by reaching a threshold that increases the abilities, skills, advances of your character. It is not as exciting though because you cannot actually see the places you cannot go to as it is not indicated. I find that bland. I like both progressions to exist together but just horizontal is boring and not good enough to get my blood pumping when I am running through Kithicor with a level 6 halfling.
Show me exactly what you put in a horizontal progression that is so different from vertical. Does it involve giving your character options, power, skills, abilities, access, money or any advantage. Can't that be done vertically too?
The point is this, people do not actually look at what vertical progression does. They just assume it is just your level. However vertical can include all those things that horizontal does but affixes those advances to a number. Horizontal gives you progress but without the bells and whistles and I love bells and whistles ladies and gentleman.
While there's a lot of formerly meaningful content that's being wasted, some of it's still playable enough, such as "Hard Mode" for certain dungeons. It's an issue for many reasons, but there's enough solo and group content as a result. It's impossible to have balance, but having options alleviates some of it.
There are things that the old fossil could teach. It might have the concept for the best 'leveling' system, something that new MMOs should try to experiment with.
Sure, Runescape has similar systems, but it still has a much worse archaic grind overall.
Outside of that, in other games, levels is just a stupid gate. Classics like Ragnarok Online treat it as a throw-away because a new advancement/time gate is tied to it.
What's the point of levels if it ends up being a matter of gear and stat allocation?
Some games tie leveling in to the story, but that also pushes you into the 'endgame' point faster, but without any freedom. Elsword, as one good example.
But then, what is endgame? It's just people hitting level caps and grinding for gear. That's almost the entirety of 'endgame'. In PSO2NGS, it's affix grinding or meseta grinding for fashion/affixes. It doesn't really respect the player's time, but compared to other games, it functions perfect for today's casuals -and- doesn't require you to be glued to the game 24/7.
Which is then the other problem. Time. Why do people want to be stuck playing one game forever, as if it were a job? It doesn't make sense for a game to have so much 'content' that ends up outdated instead of updated.
It should be okay to have the game end, and it should also be okay for a game to end for the month/year/date.
=================
The other problem is 'accomplishment'.
Why is killing a bunch of trash mobs for XP that devs put at an arbitrarily high values?
You need 2B exp to level from 199 to 200! Yay!
Level capping was NEVER an accomplishment. It's something we all decided as teenagers in our respective game/community, because ooooh, big number.
Just like eSports isn't a real sport; developers decide the rules. They can alter the balance of the game at will. Characters can be nerfed without needing player input.
You put in 2 hours to grind 2% exp, for what? 50 hours later, then what? A community pat on the back?
It's not like most games have deep combat systems, either. It's usually just tab target and clicking. Using skills at certain times isn't exactly skill. Dodging is really just clicking to get out of a zone, either by an animation tell or a graphed tell.
MMOs were at a peak in the 2000's because of the escapism and the slow erosion of reality. It was a time where things were affordable. Each year past 2010 was slowly leading up to the present where time is much more important because time is money, and if you get sick, you may end up homeless.
People wanted to live in fantasies, so the grind was fine; they worked to their magical number in the world they wanted to live in.
But now, that bubble needs to burst. MMOs are a dying breed because there's no real point in progression, nor are there many fantastical worlds that exist.
It's how Genshin and Mihoyo's other crap captured so many weebs, giving 'unique' worlds, even if the gameplay grew to be mediocre and unchanging. HSR will only have more stat checks, and as a turn-based game with basic controls, it will never be anything more than grind so you can hit higher numbers.
Those games operate on the previously established MMO logic. Yet, their success, despite having the same fundamentals, exist because there's more to a game than just levels.
There are also other important factors. Subscription MMOs.
Can you imagine paying to level at a rate of mediocre %'s per hour?
MMOs are in a hard place because they basically don't exist outside some generic big names. One factor, major or minor, is the fact all data exists just to be deleted; it shows that the game wasn't just made to be a game, but a money printer.
Shut up and buy your 2X/50% EXP boosters that conveniently stack with our 1-week 2X exp boost event.
Attaching progression as you suggested to only your character that is not dependent on gear is exactly what alternative advancement was in Everquest 2. You can have levels and horizontal progression existing in the same game like they have done in other games.
When you basically stagnate or cause a character to remain around everyone else it does not give players any satisfaction of gaining anything because they are unable to compare themselves to others. Yes people enjoy seeing themselves advancing and comparing themselves to others. It's a natural thing to do.
Actually if you look at the very slow levelling in Dungeons and Dragons Online and when you finally get to 20 you go on to continuously improving your character it is similar to what you are suggesting albeit after you have levelled to level 20.
I do not think vertical and horizontal leveling is different at all aside from not seeing the obvious indications in one over the other.
https://eq2.fandom.com/wiki/Alternate_Advancement#:~:text=You earn Alternate Advancement points by:&text=Every level after 10 until,will receive 3 AA points.&text=Once a player reaches 280,additional points to reach 280.
and this
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/homebrew-house-rules/116313-level-20-characters
Read after the first three posts where he explains about Epic Boons.
All I remember when I tried it was everyone wanting to kill each other...i dont remember alot of "LFG" in chat...Im guessing all the grouping is same corp only?