Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 04:58:46 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Do levels suck? 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Do levels suck?  (Read 72636 times)
Raph
Developers
Posts: 1472

Title delayed while we "find the fun."


WWW
on: December 22, 2005, 10:24:25 PM

If anyone wants to join the debate, it's ongoing at my blog -- lengthy article. Start with Part 1, of course, but save comments till after part 2. :)

http://www.raphkoster.com/?p=214 is part 1, there's a link at the bottom to part II.
Righ
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6542

Teaching the world Google-fu one broken dream at a time.


Reply #1 on: December 22, 2005, 11:52:46 PM

Yes, they do. So does character development. I'd like my character to be perfect from the start, thank you. Now write me a game, not a slow character builder. Commented to that effect. :)

The camera adds a thousand barrels. - Steven Colbert
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #2 on: December 23, 2005, 02:15:45 AM

If you need to ask, you know the answer.
Tebonas
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6365


Reply #3 on: December 23, 2005, 02:25:38 AM

I need some sort of character development. Its fun for me. If its fun. I like putting skillpoints in skills, I like to test out new abilites, I like to gradually get new options once I used the old options for some while. I like to get into my character as the character grows. I like having fun while I do it.

I don't like getting SpellA_03 exactly 5600 killed foozles after SpellA_07, which does exactly the same, but better.

Make leveling fun, and I don't mind it. Let it happen gradually while playing the game and it is a added bonus once in a while. Make it a goal by itself and I get bored.

But there are different crowds, you can't please everybody. Games without character development suck. They are boring and pointless. Righ and I would have each others perfect game.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #4 on: December 23, 2005, 04:09:06 AM

There's a lot to say about this, and I'm going to do so without reading the comments on your article, or really the article. By asking the question the way you have in the title of this thread, reading the article would be completely counter productive in answering the question. The important thing is that we come to the same conclusion on our own.

Do levels suck? No.
Does the current implementation of levels suck? Yes.
Are levels used as a self-implemented set of training wheels for which developers to structure games around? Yes.
Are levels a way of shortbussing progress in a game for the average user? Yes.


We're looking at a lowest common denominator thing here. Your average monosyllabic MMOG player can understand numbers. 60 is the highest number you can become and you start out at level 1. Therefore I want to be 60. It's the achiever credo. They don't think beyond that. Your average MMOG player couldn't give a shit about allakhazam or thottbot and probably doesn't know what the absolute best gear for a classe is or what the flavor of the month might be this time. He's looking for fun. And when fun is defined by the developers as what area you are in, what armor/weapons you can use at your current level (and in turn how cool they look), and what number is next to your name upon /examine - that is what they user will think as well. Sure, the people at f13 don't think like that. We know better. And we call you on this sort of shit on a near daily basis. But I can only assume this question came up because Raph wants to make a game without levels.

Bravo. But here's why it won't work. Not the first time around at least.

MMOG players, for the most part are NOT GOOD AT GAMES[/I]. And I don't mean MMOGs alone. I mean any game. Particularly strategy games and skill based games like an FPS (sure, there are exceptions to this - GunzOnline, Planetside, etc). But your average MMOG user probably bites ass at most skill based games. For every one very skilled gamer that plays an MMOG, there's probably 1,000 who play MMOGs that like the even footing everyone starts on. Sure, they also like playing with friends and making new friends and the biggest amount of jealousy that can come between them is what equipment your friends have. Which is cool in a way. I mean, you've got these people, they're a group of four longtime real-life friends. They each pick a different class and for the most part have different equipment and everything is peachy. The game is fun. You may know what to do to solve the problems an MMOG throws at you but the toughest fight/mechanic in an MMOG is easier than just about everything out there. This is where levels come in - how can one player beat another player? Time invested and efficiency of experience farming. MMOG developers Harrison Bergeron their consumers to maximize the amount of time they'll give money to the game. And (much like the legalization of marijuana) a change in this system won't occur on a large scale until someone figures out a way to rake in more than $15 a month (proper micropayments might get that job done - which opens up another can of worms which I'll address at the bottom for shits and giggles). Just to hammer the point home, here's the opening of Harrison Bergeron:

Quote
THE YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.

THAT'S NOT HOW THE WORLD WORKS. But that's what is done to us in the fantasy lands of MMOGs. Ok, Mr. Warrior, you're really strong but miss a lot, can wear heavy armor and can't cast magic. Mr. Priest - you control how much people heal, but watch out because, ironically, you have the least number of hit points. Rogues? You're useless. By definition you're too strong. The title is all you get. Enjoy it. Mages - twiddle those fingers, you couldn't kill a fly with a flyswatter. Yes, to some degree this is necessary handicapping but adding levels on top of it? Just. Mean. There is however something to be said about a hybrid level/skill system. Think back to the original Wild Arms (or even the more recent Magna Carta). Obtaining new skilsl and gaining levels were two different things.

1. With each level or half level some core stats go up, level gets a +1 counter, and your vitals reflect the core stat increase.

2. With each use in the mastering of a lower level skill, you are one step closer to learning the basics of the skill above that.

Those of incredible efficiency in damage but not damage mitigation may max out his skills and what he has access too very early. But he may bite as at damage mitigation, so he can't whack near as many foozles as the next guy. This creates a problem though. Which is more powreful - skills or levels. At level 99 is the level 10 skill more powerful than if you got the level 99 skill at level 10? In wild Arms and Magna Carta this doesn't matter. Rules don't have to make sense. Only one person has to follow them. There is no multiplayer - it makes balance uber easy. Who was strong, Palom or Porom? Didn't matter.

Now, a topic I almost never touch on, but humor me for a moment:

We need levels. Or at least some physical representation of growth. Something tangible in the game whether it be new skills or hit points or a simply increase of +1 or even a title. That something should never be taken away from the player. As long as the player invests enough time (think: Eve) that player is like everyone else who played 100 hours. But that's fine because skill is not of essence in these games. If you're going to create the great equalizer, it shouldn't be done halfassed - which is how it's done now. Go all the fucking way. Equalize the entire population. It's the easiest game to blance. It's not fun, but then again, WoW isn't fun to me.

The other option....ditch levels entirely. Be the first MMOG developer to make a non-combat based social MMORPG with a working economy that people want to play. If Teppy removed the tedium from creating mundane bullshit in ATiTD, you can bet your sweet ass I'd be all over it. Even though the skills have levels, there's nothing stopping anyone from leaning whatever whenver. And as much as it pains me to the core to say this, a disgusting bastard child of Hello Kitty Online and The Sims Online may be a fun game to play (if either of the originals were fun). Hello Kitty Online, for a child's game, has a deep economic backdrop. People create and run shops and it will probably be single handedly responsible for teaching the very young gamers ideas like bartering and capitalism. Assuming it ever comes out. The Sims Online, on paper, is fucking brilliant. Pimp your crib in a neighborhood with friends and then.....CHAT. Take that one step further, add in some sort of Harvest Moon farming mechanic or something even way more bizarre like the non-combat side of Startopia.

I guess when it all comes down to it, levels represent how many foozles you whacked. I'm tired of whacking foozles with a number key. I might as well be playing Mario Teaches Typing: The MMOG Hotkey Edition.

Micropayments. I'll keep this short and super sweet:

1. Don't sell anything that effects combat in a combat game.
2. Only sell exclusive things in a limited amount (like design a couch for a house, and only sell 500 of them. Take the Lars Teten cigar model to an extreme (christ, I can't believe I just reference Lars Teten - I don't think I could get more esoteric, ever). Make everything you sell in a limited number so people feel obligated to spend money. Also, offer incentives. If you spend $25 ($10 more than the price of a sub) in one of the MMOGs Micropayment Marketplace you get half taken off of your monthly fee.

Anyway, it's super late and I'm rambling. I'll discuss more of this tomorrow hopeuflly.
dEOS
Terracotta Army
Posts: 91


Reply #5 on: December 23, 2005, 04:56:12 AM

Blah blah blah...

For me (and my guess is that I am not alone),
- FPS == everybody on equal foot
- MMORPG == level grinding

MMORPGs center everything around character levels so the question is not really if levels suck but how they are rewarded... and how they stop me/us from playing how I/we intend to (be that with friends or alone).

WoW: 1-60 is enjoyable because it's a fast journey. Level rewards are very low... and I guess if there was a real level grind as in other MMORPGs, WoW wouldn't be that successful. Level gap basically means you can't play with friend until you are level 60.

CoH/CoV: Your character progresses dramatically up to lvl 30 and then the grind starts. You are rewarded each level with either a new power to choose from or slots to add to your powers. The level reward is not that good because once you have all your *core* powers the rest is fluff and the games become to be an immense grind just to get more slots added to your powers. My guess is that your bell curve is a bit different in CoH... A lot of people have characters stuck at various levels because they have seen all the core powers of that character / they don't feel like grinding with it anymore. The motivation to get to 50 with every toon is low. Altaholism is strong in CoH/CoV because people want to experience the powers... Level gap is alleviated by an intelligent sidekick system though.

AC2 (I know it's going to close): Endless grind... The true definition of having to spend the rest of the eternity to get any progress on your toon. 2 years on the hero system which added 100 levels above the 50 already existing ones... and most people barely scratched lvl 80 after 2 years. Lots of people left in disgust. Level reward was very low. You just added a few points to one of your skill and you did 2 more points of damage after months of grinding. Yeah. 5 level gaps and you can't play with friends. Moreover levels mean everything between doom & success in both PvE and PvP (defense & attacks were basically a factor of your level). Most moronic implementation.

AC1: 1-50 (out of a max of around 230 levels) is an easy level grind. Be that trough quests or dungeon grinding. Once you are level 50 you can group with anyone above lvl 50 without any constraint. You progress through levels and gain more capacity in skills you have. There is character & loot progression but it is not THAT critical to your chances of success in a group. The only AC1 problem was that this rather good system was destroyed by allegiance XP chains and macroing. Before that, there was a feeling of achievement even if that didn't make you overpowered. Level gap post-50 exists in abilities in PvE and PvP but that it's not that tangible. In AC1 mobs level didn't really mean anything, you could be lvl 20 and fighting mobs lvl 126+.

So yes levels suck because most of the time they are just an indication of the time you are able to spend in front of your monitor and not in any way, the correct reprentation of your abilities to hunt/trade/explore... it's just your ability to "catass". The feeling of achievement in a MMORPG is very long gone. WoW in some parts of it still has some (ability to do certain raids) but mostly it's just time spent in front of keyboards which might be fun for your first MMORPG but that also is not only not fun in your 2nd MMORPG and is very anti-casual players.

So IMHO levels should have a feeling of achievement so in that regard the grind is primordial but they shouldn't make a huge difference in your abilities especially when there is PvP involved. Having all the combat odds already be clear when I look at how a mob or character cons is just unrealistic. Ten minutes ago I was dead meat for that mob and now I can beat it ? Err, I didn't progress that much, did I ?

CoH - Freedom
WoW - EU Servers - Sargeras [French-PvP]
Xilren's Twin
Moderator
Posts: 1648


Reply #6 on: December 23, 2005, 08:05:47 AM

Posted there as well.  BTW, Raph, that pages crawls for me.  Any idea why?

Someone beat me to it, but I’ll echo the sentiment. Levels don’t suck; it’s how they are implemented that usually sucks. The presence or absence of leveling is not a predictor of good gameplay. How many Hit points a fighter gets per level compared to a mage or what % a skill goes up when used…all of that is purely aribrary number crunching to make the in game fomulae work.

What matters to me at this point is the much more basic view: how does the game actually PLAY moment to moment. If I’m going to spend 95% or better of my time in combat, then design a fun combat system or advancement system begind it wont matter.

Thats why DDO is proving interesting; they are making combat have more twitch like aspects and I think that will be the major determining factor on if players like their game not the D&D background (complete with levels, although only 10 of them). They are also changing the reward mechanism to quest completion rather than monster kills. Both of those things are new takes on implementation, and THAT’s what I want to see more of.

Xilren

"..but I'm by no means normal." - Schild
Lt.Dan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 758


Reply #7 on: December 23, 2005, 09:55:51 AM

This reminds me of a recent debate on these forums about how hps are broken and the holy trinity is the root of all evil.  And like then I think we're getting stuck on changes to systems (hps, HAM, etc)  instead of making changes to gameplay (autoattack, clickfest, twitch) to make the game more fun.

Levels are a system.  Skills are a system.  Levels and Skills are a system.  No single system by itself is necessarily better or worse than others (as others have already said, implementation matters), except EQ derivative autoattack, which is uniformly worse.  We're done with that.  Mobile bags of improvement.  We can work out any game based on this approach and be broadcasting 'lf damage healer' in as long as it takes people to work out the grouping function.  Try some new gameplay.  For the children.

Kail
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2858


Reply #8 on: December 23, 2005, 10:00:36 AM

BTW, Raph, that pages crawls for me.  Any idea why?

I'm getting some weirdness there,too; the graphs all some across as blank white squares (but I can save them and view them locally fine, for some reason), and that "content creation" page doesn't want to scroll more than about a page down.  -shrug-

I have two things I'd like to add that I didn't see there.

1- Levels, to me, seem like a very, very lazy shortcut in most computer games.  In D&D, you're rolling dice and scribbling notes on looseleaf; you need to keep the numbers simple or the game gets insane.  Levels are a way to do that.  Your average PC, though, does nothing better than keeping track of complex mathematical junk, so they don't have that excuse.  They are, at best, a gross oversimplification of reality, and at worst completely unrealistic and counterintuitive.  It just seems like if you want to simulate character advancement and combat ability, you could do it much more accurately than you can by using "levels."

2- A bigger problem, to me, is the issue of character persistence and "ownership."  In most MMOGs you don't "own" your characters; you rent them for $15/month.  A level based system seems to me to be by necessity a linear system: you go from low level to mid level to high level.  These two traits to not go well together in my mind.  I can stomach the fact that I'm paying a subscription fee for the internet or my phone or whatever.  If I don't want to use it, I don't have to pay.  Moreover, if someone changes my service, I can walk away, no big deal.  But if I'm playing an MMORPG, it seems likely that there will be something I want to do that I can't do right now, because I'm not high enough level (some skill I want, some item I can't use, some dungeon I want to see, something like that).  And at that point, it seems like I'm not paying for what I want, but for the opportunity to possibly get what I want some time in the future.  Like getting cable TV today so I can watch a show in six months.  That's annoying in itself, but it introduces a ton of complications when you take into account the fluidity of these games.  Star Wars Galaxies is probably the most obvious recent example (even though it didn't, if I recall correctly, use levels per se), where a lot of people were driven into a frenzy over the idea that all of their previous work with their characters would be erased or negated.
It just seems to me like a lot of the time, people in MMORPGs aren't having fun, they're doing preparatory work (grinding) so that they can have fun later.  That sounds suspiciously like work to me.  Work that we pay the company to let us do, and then they keep the work and our money and make no promises regarding our having fun in the future.  That reads a lot like a bad deal to me, and it looks like implementing levels (or any kind of strictly linear progression) more or less forces the game in that direction.  There will always be something that my level prevents me from doing that I want to do, so there will always be that kind of "I'm doing this stuff so I can eventually have fun" kind of mentality to much of the game, and that does not mesh well with a subscription fee, for me.
shiznitz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4268

the plural of mangina


Reply #9 on: December 23, 2005, 10:08:06 AM

I don't mean to kiss Raph butt, but UO's skill system is EXACTLY what I want as far as "levels." Let people mix and match a variety of combat and non-combat skills that have complemetary effects. Don;t make the game about gaining skills, though. Make that easy. Make the game about deciding how to mix and match under a skill cap.

I have never played WoW.
bhodi
Moderator
Posts: 6817

No lie.


Reply #10 on: December 23, 2005, 10:23:24 AM

I don't mean to kiss Raph butt, but UO's skill system is EXACTLY what I want as far as "levels." Let people mix and match a variety of combat and non-combat skills that have complemetary effects. Don;t make the game about gaining skills, though. Make that easy. Make the game about deciding how to mix and match under a skill cap.

I completely agree. Tank mages using harm wands of DOOM and recalling away when the going gets too tough are exactly what I want a MORPG to be! :)
Raph
Developers
Posts: 1472

Title delayed while we "find the fun."


WWW
Reply #11 on: December 23, 2005, 11:45:38 AM

No idea on the slow page/not being able to scroll thing. The images are just GIFs, and for some reasons IE is refusing to show them. They look fine on Firefox.

I can telll who read the article and who didn't. :)
Xilren's Twin
Moderator
Posts: 1648


Reply #12 on: December 23, 2005, 12:04:40 PM

No idea on the slow page/not being able to scroll thing. The images are just GIFs, and for some reasons IE is refusing to show them. They look fine on Firefox.

I can telll who read the article and who didn't. :)

You non conformist you.

To be clear, while I did read both articles, they just struck me as ivory tower.  Why do we want to devote pages of debate to something which is meaningless without a good gameplay foundation?  You could take original EQ, keep all the levels, classes, zones, equipment, factions etc etc and make a totally new game just by swapping out the combat mini game and exp rewarding mechanism for a different one.  Ok perhaps meaningless is too strong a word, but I think my point holds.  You said it yourself; most computer RPG combat stinks; since these games are generally combat heavy, focus there first and THEN determine what sort of level/leveless advancement system you want to build on top of it....

Xilren

"..but I'm by no means normal." - Schild
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #13 on: December 23, 2005, 12:06:11 PM

Sucking, not sucking is irrelevant.
Players want structure.
Levels provide structure.
Levels are simple.
If you want to replace levels, it better provide structure and be simple.

"Me am play gods"
Nyght
Terracotta Army
Posts: 538


Reply #14 on: December 23, 2005, 12:14:39 PM

You could take original EQ, keep all the levels, classes, zones, equipment, factions etc etc and make a totally new game just by swapping out the combat mini game and exp rewarding mechanism for a different one.  Ok perhaps meaningless is too strong a word, but I think my point holds.  You said it yourself; most computer RPG combat stinks; since these games are generally combat heavy, focus there first and THEN determine what sort of level/leveless advancement system you want to build on top of it....

Xilren

Yep. Which is part of the reason I want to call Bullshit on the that old Content Costs more with Size. In most modern commercial MMORPG it must have reached it's cap cost early on.

Single player game development cost models work just fine. Content = playtime. As evidence: WoW and your own NGE.


"Do you know who is in charge here?" -- "Yep."
Xilren's Twin
Moderator
Posts: 1648


Reply #15 on: December 23, 2005, 12:30:58 PM

Sucking, not sucking is irrelevant.

Yeah, we learned that from Wish, Horizons, Earth & Beyond, Sims Online, Shadowbane, Asheron's Call2, early Anarachy Online and WW2Online, etc etc....oh wait.

Quote
Players want structure.
Levels provide structure.
Levels are simple.
If you want to replace levels, it better provide structure and be simple.

Who said anything about replacing levels?  Levels can be fine and bring a lot of positives to the table as Raph noted in his writeups.  The point is, it's not the levels that makes the game, it's the implementation that does.  Structure is great, but any structure needs a decent foundation...

Xilren

"..but I'm by no means normal." - Schild
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #16 on: December 23, 2005, 12:43:06 PM

Wish didn't suck.

Quote from: Raph
So, my answer in the end? Levels don’t suck in every way. There’s plenty of good stuff they bring to the table. But if we’re smart, I think we can have all that stuff without levels themselves.

Raph is.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2005, 12:44:58 PM by tazelbain »

"Me am play gods"
shiznitz
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4268

the plural of mangina


Reply #17 on: December 23, 2005, 01:05:02 PM

Would levels with a flat hp curve be ok? The exponential hp curves are really the crux of the grind problem.

I have never played WoW.
Raph
Developers
Posts: 1472

Title delayed while we "find the fun."


WWW
Reply #18 on: December 23, 2005, 05:03:55 PM


Yep. Which is part of the reason I want to call Bullshit on the that old Content Costs more with Size. In most modern commercial MMORPG it must have reached it's cap cost early on.

Single player game development cost models work just fine. Content = playtime. As evidence: WoW and your own NGE.


I already told Nyght he's nuts in three different ways ont he blog, but I'll say it here too. Nyght, you're nuts.

1, content != playtime in any games today, typically.

2, commercial MMORPGs may have reached a cost cap with WoW, but to say that content reached a cap cost early on is ludicrous. The content cost of WoW probably is equal to the total development cost of EQ2+SWG+EQ+UO. :P

3, single player development cost models are in crisis too, and it's been the talk of the industry for a few years and was practically the unofficial theme of last GDC.

Raph
Developers
Posts: 1472

Title delayed while we "find the fun."


WWW
Reply #19 on: December 23, 2005, 05:05:59 PM

To be clear, while I did read both articles, they just struck me as ivory tower.  Why do we want to devote pages of debate to something which is meaningless without a good gameplay foundation?  You could take original EQ, keep all the levels, classes, zones, equipment, factions etc etc and make a totally new game just by swapping out the combat mini game and exp rewarding mechanism for a different one.  Ok perhaps meaningless is too strong a word, but I think my point holds.  You said it yourself; most computer RPG combat stinks; since these games are generally combat heavy, focus there first and THEN determine what sort of level/leveless advancement system you want to build on top of it....

Xilren

I suspect the demands of levels end up shaping the gameplay foundation. Consider what the traditional level assumptions do to FPS gameplay, for example. I agree with you on your final sentence: pick the gameplay system first, then decide if you need levels to provide the feedback. Currently, typically the levels are assumed to start with.
Nyght
Terracotta Army
Posts: 538


Reply #20 on: December 23, 2005, 05:22:55 PM

I already told Nyght he's nuts in three different ways ont he blog, but I'll say it here too. Nyght, you're nuts.

Better me then you   :-D

"Do you know who is in charge here?" -- "Yep."
Samwise
Moderator
Posts: 19212

sentient yeast infection


WWW
Reply #21 on: December 23, 2005, 05:27:37 PM

I think in order to come up with an alternative way to provide this particular benefit:

Quote
regular changes or variation in the challenges undertaken within a given playstyle


you're going to need to decide first what the gameplay consists of - in other words, what sorts of playstyles your game can support and what sorts of challenges each one faces.

"I have not actually recommended many games, and I'll go on the record here saying my track record is probably best in the industry." - schild
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #22 on: December 23, 2005, 05:37:12 PM

I'll admit it. I didn't read the article. But I did read this thread title and gave my opinion. The problem here is I really don't think that magical no level game is going to get made any time soon. All of the pontification in the world won't speed up the process. It's simply the best way to force manage the players time. Or at least the easiest and efficient way. And I can't really come up with an entirely better way myself. I've thought long and hard on the subject and it's been ingrained into my brain that levels are the way to go since Final Fantasy I. Ironically, the counterpoint to that is Zelda. But that had levels too, they were called dungeon. How far are you in Zelda? 7th Dungeon. How far are you in WoW? 38th Level. Same fucking thing.
Lum
Developers
Posts: 1608

Hellfire Games


Reply #23 on: December 23, 2005, 05:37:57 PM

Read the article.

I'd like to comment on it, but I really don't know what to add. Raph lays it out pretty conclusively.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #24 on: December 23, 2005, 05:58:57 PM

Ok, so reading through the article I come to this conclusion (I read about half the comments):

Raph agrees with me but masturbation is easier than implementation.

I mean I look at every game on the market and everything has levels now. Including sports games, racing games (sure, subset of sports games), action games, even FPS titles (BF2 anyone?). They've permeated everything. Getting rid of them is an impossibility. The question I see is - how can we make online play as engaging as God of War or Resident Evil 4 instead of say.....everything else. So I take back my first post, levels don't suck and the implementation doesn't suck. It worked fine in Dragon Quest VII and Digital Devil Saga and it works fine in MMORPGs. The rate of advacement might suck though. The number of levels may changes which sucks ass well (as it's a total copout by developers). So here's how I'm looking at it, why is every MMORPG based on a mud. With the net gen of consoles I don't see why we couldn't have an (aforementioned) Resident Evil OG with Resident Evil 4 gameplay. That would be astounding. Have a max of 3-4 people per instance? I'd pay out the asshole for that. I'm sure a lot of people would, Resident Evil sells pretty goddamn well. Better than any MMORPG out there. But there are levels. They are just shown through your weapons instead of your level as a character. I know how far someone is in [RE4] when they get the Butterfly. I know how far someone is in God of War when they get the swords or when they max out certain abilities.

So, are levels the enemy? No. Are they implemented properly for their given genre? Yes. Are there alternatives? Yes. But not for levels. Only for the games. In other words, stop making shitty treadmill based RPGs (which Raph agrees with me on in the second page when he says typical RPG combat sucks) and suddenly the problem of levels gets moved into an entirely different system. Which brings us back to what is probably the oldest question on teh intarweb about MMOGs. When are we going to introduce a skill other than "pushing a hotkey" into MMORPGs? Star Wars tried the over the shoulder aiming reticle thing (which, I'll say again, is a step in the right direction). But it was implemented for shit.

In other words: As an industry we're getting there. I think it's worrying about gameplay is more important than worrying about levels though. The big problem is who is going to fund something other than a typical RPG online? I don't know. Try Capcom or Namco or a company that doesn't solely make shitty typical RPGs. I'd hazard to guess they'd be more interested (read Kojima's recent thoughts on a metal gear solid online game) than SOE, NCSoft, Webzen (though they are making Huxley), Mythic, Turbine, Squeenix, etc. They know how to make money off typical shitty RPGs. I for one can't see anything a modern RPG gives me done better in an MMOG. The experience in a single player self-contained world with a true story with it's ups and downs and told in a fashion tailored directly to me is simply more fun than most anything a MMORPG can give me. Communicating with people in an RPG is overrated. It takes away from the game. Communicating with people when you're trying to infiltrate a terrorist cell (Splinter Cell MMOG anyone?) or exterminate zombies on an island controlled by Umbrella would only add to the game.

So, do MMORPGs suck? So far, yes.
Do MMOGs suck? So far, yes.
Can that change? To which I say, do they want to? Everything I've seen points to No (here's looking at you McQuaid).

Edit: Would it be wrong of me to call all of the modern MMORPGs a chat room with a post count? What's the difference between saying "postcount ++" and gaining a level?
Raph
Developers
Posts: 1472

Title delayed while we "find the fun."


WWW
Reply #25 on: December 23, 2005, 06:36:44 PM

I already told Nyght he's nuts in three different ways ont he blog, but I'll say it here too. Nyght, you're nuts.

Better me then you   :-D

It's a well-known fact that I am nuts; every time I post on a public forum I am reminded.
Raph
Developers
Posts: 1472

Title delayed while we "find the fun."


WWW
Reply #26 on: December 23, 2005, 06:39:25 PM

Schild, you may have finally triggered the in-depth post on player skill and treadmills. :P
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #27 on: December 23, 2005, 06:48:27 PM

The experience in a single player self-contained world with a true story with it's ups and downs and told in a fashion tailored directly to me is simply more fun than most anything a MMORPG can give me.

Not to me.  The single player RPG is a single pass through.  It's like a movie.  Play it once and your done.  I can only watch (play) so many crappy single player RPGs before I'm done (I'm pretty much done).  An FPS game played online is different with each match, and my skill level gradually increases as I play... but only so much.  Also, a FPS has the same mechanics every time I play.  I can only play so much of a game with the same mechanics before I'm done (pretty much done with FPS).

MMO games broaden the single player RPG by adding other people into the mix, and attempt to balance "game" and "world".  A really good MMO would have many different "games" (character progression paths) within a world.  A great MMO would have many different games within a world, and some of those games would be based on skill.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #28 on: December 23, 2005, 07:03:20 PM

Schild, you may have finally triggered the in-depth post on player skill and treadmills. :P

If games told a consistant story that moved along at a brisk pace WHILE you were gaining levels (an interesting story as well, look at Final Fantasy IV for an example), people wouldn't bitch and moan about the treadmills. It's not my fault the people who write lore for MMORPGs are uninteresting. It does help that the worlds current MMORPGs inhabit suck as well though. I'm not going to make a post about treadmills. It's all been said. They are a symptom of the destination being more interesting than the journey. The destination being level 60 and the end of the journey being....end of the journey? MMORPGs never end. The greatest flaw of all.

Take a look at the Resident Evil Online idea, these aren't players against eachother (though there's  A LOT you could do in that with PvP). There has to be some way to match people up in terms of skill. It doesn't mean the game won't be fun for people that are shitty at it. I like DDOs solution of adding a difficulty to quests. Though they need to work on it, it's a big step in the right direction.
Nyght
Terracotta Army
Posts: 538


Reply #29 on: December 23, 2005, 07:09:27 PM

If games told a consistant story that moved along at a brisk pace WHILE you were gaining levels (an interesting story as well, look at Final Fantasy IV for an example), people wouldn't bitch and moan about the treadmills. It's not my fault the people who write lore for MMORPGs are uninteresting. It does help that the worlds current MMORPGs inhabit suck as well though. I'm not going to make a post about treadmills. It's all been said. They are a symptom of the destination being more interesting than the journey. The destination being level 60 and the end of the journey being....end of the journey? MMORPGs never end. The greatest flaw of all.

Well, they can't you know because it costs too much and whatnot.

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

"Do you know who is in charge here?" -- "Yep."
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #30 on: December 23, 2005, 07:15:54 PM

I agree and disagree. Do you know how many hundreds of millions of dollars get pumped into games that are shitty at the design document level each year? Just looking at MMORPG.com's list of "games in development" I see a grand total of maybe 7 games that deserve having money put toward them and about 4 indipendent titles I'd like to see finished just as a proof of concept. The rest of that money is going into another flavor of your standard shitty medieval grind.
raydeen
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1246


Reply #31 on: December 23, 2005, 07:18:15 PM

I haven't read the articles and quickly skimmed the thread thus far (will go back and read tomorrow and most likely find that I've made an ass of myself here but oh well), but here's my take on levels. Levels are good, but the best interpretation I've ever seen of a level based RPG was Daggerfall. It remains my favorite RPG of all time. Players gained levels but only through repeated use of their major and minor skill sets. No exp from quests. No exp from mobs. And it forced the player to 'roleplay' that character. A warrior had to swing his sword and use shields and armor to gain exp and levels. A wizard had to cast spells and mix reagents. A thief had to sneak around and steal things. It made for a more immersive setting than just about any other game out there, even today. The only problem with this approach was that some classes were much easier than others. Playing a straight healer was a pain in the butt, but the challenge made it fun. I can only imagine the horrors that would come from implementing this in a multi-player environment (especiallly a PVP one), but I'd play it in a heartbeat. I loved it close to 10 years ago and I'd love it today. Is it feasible? Don't know, but I'd like to see it tried. I'd also like to see canned NPC and player responce text replaced with a dynamic parser based system (like Zork only more complex) but that's probably asking for the moon. And literacy on the part of the player base.

I was drinking when I wrote this, so sue me if it goes astray.
Nyght
Terracotta Army
Posts: 538


Reply #32 on: December 23, 2005, 07:40:33 PM

I agree and disagree. Do you know how many hundreds of millions of dollars get pumped into games that are shitty at the design document level each year? Just looking at MMORPG.com's list of "games in development" I see a grand total of maybe 7 games that deserve having money put toward them and about 4 indipendent titles I'd like to see finished just as a proof of concept. The rest of that money is going into another flavor of your standard shitty medieval grind.

Agreed. But heres the deal. In Raph's Content subarticle, he argues that content cost is a function game size. The larger the player base, the higher costs PER hour of developed content.

What I am saying is that this cost per unit of content caps at a certain playerbase size. A size far less then the typical modern MMORPG achieves. So, in essence, beyond a subscription rate of say 100,000 accounts, one hour of play content costs the same if developed for that 100,000 or 1,000,000 players.

This is one of his arguments against levels; they are inefficient uses of development time because they don't produce a corollary subscription length. And my read is that he is trying to clever and use a nonlevel based system to overcome these inefficiencies.

I disagree. Content = subscription length if you look at it from the prospective of traditional single player games, which I believe WoW did (for example).

According to Raph, I nuts. Sometimes the asylum escapes the gates however.

"Do you know who is in charge here?" -- "Yep."
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #33 on: December 23, 2005, 07:44:39 PM

I don't know. Why do there have to be 10,000 people on a server? Why not make a full game fit for 50 people. Say I bought a subscription. I could invite 50 people to live in my pocket world. Would that be more manageable? Hell, make it 10 people. I can only have 10 friends with me through the entire game. That would result in something far more manageable. You wouldn't have to create little community centers for 10,000 and could make a single cohesive game perhaps with 1/10th as many quests and storylines as there are now.
Akkori
Terracotta Army
Posts: 574


Reply #34 on: December 23, 2005, 08:01:39 PM

Just dont show the player the levels. Dazzle them with stories, player-generated content, and a massive skill library. I've seen some interesting skill-progression styles. Eve and its time-based model, ATitD with its buy-endless-skills model, SWG with limited pre-set skills, and it seems like they all have something good going for them.

I dont care about levels. I dont care if I'm level 1 or level 9,923. I just want to have fun. I dont want to play an online FPS. I want to play an ever-evolving online game where I can meet up with real-life friends or new Internet friends and play. I think the above poster who mentioned fast-paced stories is right on. Add to that the ability for Characters to take part in the Lore and Legend of the game. Give them a rapidly advancing series of Story Arcs, ala SWG's aborted Cries of Alderaan.

It seems to me that if everyone is able to participate effectively in some fashion, then their levels wont matter as much. Make the difference between level 1 and level 100 minimal enough that it does not guarantee that a level 100 guy will automatically beat a level 1 guy. Look, for me its all about flexibility in skills. I never played it, but there is a console game, I think in the Final Fantasy series, where you picked skills from a circular setup. There were a dozen different Circles that connected in a limited fashion to other circles. You bought your way through them in a completely personal manner, buying what YOU wanted. To some degree SWG did this as well with is old skill system. I thought it was fantastic that you could take one tree in a half dozen different professions, allowing you to do a LOT of things.

Min/Maxers love levels and stuff because they can get out their calculators and try and be "better" than everyone else. If there was no "better", then maybe instead they would just do something that they thought was fun. I hope that the guys running Dark & Light will get their heads out of their asses and release some more information on their crafting and political systems. I was very interested to hear that there will be about 42 different Trades available, but you would only be able to Master maybe one, and dabble in a couple others. Even with 5 (supposedly) toons per account, thats still not enough to do it all. I am really hoping that its true, and that there will be an opportunity there to be a little different from others.

Its been my experience (limited) that one of the things many MMO players want is to be unique (or at least uncommon), or at least to have something unique. Even if its just some kind of visual equipment. Couple that concept with a massive skill system AND a fast-paced Story Arc, and I think peoples focus on Levels will get buried. Dont give people the time to sit back and calculate out the FOTM template. But again, they have to be able to get involved in *some* fashion pretty quickly.

I am continually amazed about one thing. Why is it that none of the "big" MMO's out there let PLAYERS contribute to the stories running? There are millions of people out there playing these games who can write or draw. There are easily *hundreds* of them in every game who can write/draw at least as good as the people getting paid to develop our current MMO's. Why dont game companies put in a system wherein Players are able to write or script Story Arcs, and to submit Art? I know at least 3 people personally who would LOVE to write up a Quest, or script an encounter, or even design a dungeon. They would do it for free.

Content might be expensive, but it seems that if you let the dedicated players contribute, you can cut a lot of time of the development cycle and see a LOT more idea's roll across the screen that you would only using in-house writers.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2005, 08:09:46 PM by Akkori »

I love the position : "You're not right until I can prove you wrong!"
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Do levels suck?  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC