Slashdot Mirror


Grinding Time - On MMORPG Character Advancement

An anonymous reader alerted us that "Starglade has an editorial about character development systems, where the author discusses the two most common types of character improvement (classes & levelling, and skill based improvement), and makes some suggestions for future systems in MMORPGs."

23 of 74 comments (clear)

  1. The level grind by RogueyWon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The level grind is always a difficult issue in RPGs and particularly in MMORPGs. It does put a lot of people off and, yes, even I, a fairly avid MMORPG player, get pretty sick of it sometimes.

    The problem is that all things considered, it's probably the "least bad" way of handling character advancement in a MMORPG. Ultimately, a sense of advancement is one of the best ways of keeping players interested in a game. If you could max out a character after a couple of days, you'd probably lose interest in the game pretty quickly. No matter how wonderful the quests and other content might be, you're going to start thinking "but why should I bother"? Moreover, given that it takes the developers a considerable amount of time to design quest-related content, you're never going to be able to get enough quests to allow them to replace the level-grind as a long-term option. The challenge for developers is to make the level grind as painless and even enjoyable as possible.

    My MMORPG of choice is Final Fantasy XI. I think I can maybe shed some light on what I mean by pointing at some of the things it does right and wrong with regards to the level grind. First of all, the jobs system is a huge plus; being able to change to one job without losing my work in another is a huge plus and means that if I need a break from the level grind on my main job and there aren't any job specific quests I can go and do with it, I can switch to another job for a while and do some of the quests for that. I don't "do" crafting myself, but the skill system there seems fairly sensible; you gain skill in it by actually practicing making stuff, but there's a cap placed on your skill by your character's level, so advancing tradeskills requires a mix of practicing crafting and level grinding. The weapon skill system is similar; a level 50 character who's never used an axe before will be no better at using an axe than a level 1 character, although due to his high level, he'll learn more quickly if he tries. The requirement to form parties is also a big plus, in my opinion. Only one of the jobs in the game (Beastmaster) is capable of levelling up past about level 20 without being in a party. Personally, I don't get why people would play a MMORPG and then spend most of their time solo; if I wanted to do that, I'd be playing Morrowind. Interaction with party memebers is one of the best ways to take the sting out of the level grind, even if it can become time-consuming to put parties together at the higher levels (50+).

    That's the good stuff. Now for the areas where I think there's room for improvement. By far my biggest gripe is the fact that you'll never be fighting anything other than the same few types of enemies on the level grind. There's a huge bestiary in the game, with some really great monsters, but as most players are so risk-averse, they'll happily go from levels 1-60 fighting nothing but bats, worms, crabs and beetles. Just to point out how stupid this gets; a level 60 beetle has the exact same abilities as its level 1 cousin. The only difference is that it gets higher stats. It would be nice if the game would force you to fight more exotic and difficult creatures as you got more advanced and if... shock horror... fights actually started to need more skill at the higher levels. As it is, the only times I get to fight the more challenging creatures are when I'm on a quest. Also, I'd like to see smaller penalties for dying. It's not so bad at the lower levels; a death there might set you back about 5 minutes worth of levelling. But a death above level 50 can set you back an hour or more of work. This contributes to players being so risk-averse. I understand the need for some kind of penalty for dying, but I think that being over harsh takes a lot of the fun out of things.

    Anyway, to wrap up, the level grind is here to stay, but developers have a duty to do whatever they can to make it as fun as possible.

    1. Re:The level grind by Elsebet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Personally, I don't get why people would play a MMORPG and then spend most of their time solo; if I

      You do realize, some people want to play FFXI because they played every single other game in the series, but they don't have the multiple hours to invest in one sitting that organizing a party requires? I have heard many horror stories of people waiting HOURS to find a group that would let them in. Hours of sitting doing nothing is fun?

      What if said person wants to level their main job, not do a quest or start a sub-job, but no groups are available?

      Ever think of time zone issues, where they might play on off-peak times where the server population is lower?

      As a game ages and the average population's level range is higher, who are latecomers going to group with?

      I'm not flaming, just there's a lot of downside to the "you have to have the perfect group to advance" style of MMORPG that I thought would die with EverQuest but was reborn in FFXI. If all conditions are perfect grouping is wonderful, but how often does that happen? Having no other option is, in my opinion, terribly narrow-minded design.

      --
      Sacré-bleu! Where is me mama?
    2. Re:The level grind by RogueyWon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a semi-valid point here, but I think it misses some of the "point" of FFXI. First of all, playing the game because you played every other Final Fantasy game, while no doubt a motivation for a lot of people, isn't really the right mindset to go into this with. It's a totally different style of game and you're going to get very different things out of it. Chances are, players who are playing it purely for the "Final Fantasy" factor won't last past a couple of days anyway.

      The problems of getting into decent parties are hugely overstated, in my experience. Newbies often find it harder to get invites because there are certain ways in which they inadvertently flag themselves as newbies. Failure to set up a search comment and failure to have at least rank 3 (which you want to get as soon as you get to level 24 or 25) are the most obvious ways. FFXI's job system means that you're always going to get lots of experienced players ploughing through the lower levels and they'll need parties to do so. Look even vaguely competent and you will get invites. It's only since I got above level 50 that things have gotten a bit slower, as the majority of English-speaking players haven't penetrated to these levels yet. It'll improve over time.

      Oh, and I'm playing from the UK, where the game isn't even released yet (I imported a copy from the states) and even though I only play in the evenings here, time zone issues have never hindered me.

  2. my reply by Arngautr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not much here that isn't already in any gaming forum, though ussually less verbose. His ideal solution to gaining skills is to set a goal for your character when you leave and when you come back your character has made some progress, (reminds me of ... well I can't remember the name...little help .. not everquest but ...? ). Other methods of achieving this include World of Warcraft's "rest points" which punish players for playing too long by giving them fewer experience points on kills (Blizzard's euphamism:they'll tell you its a reward taking beaks).

  3. Eve? by MachDelta · · Score: 4, Informative
    (reminds me of ... well I can't remember the name...little help .. not everquest but ...? )
    Eve Online?
    FAQ: 2.7 How is skill advancement achieved?

    Character advancement is accomplished through the activation of skill training kits. Once a training kit is utilized, a certain period of time must elapse before training is complete and the skill is functional. The activation time required is measured in real time and training continues regardless of whether or not a player is connected to the game. The training time needed for skills may range from less than an hour to several days, depending on the type and complexity of the skill. You may only train one skill at a time, one character at a time per account. Time elapsed during training may be monitored through the character sheet.
    ?
  4. Offline-advancement? by EvilIdler · · Score: 4, Informative

    EVE Online has that. Skill training happens in linear time. It doesn't matter
    whether you're online or offline; your character spends ALL its time reading
    through technical manuals and such, and you flying around trading/killing doesn't
    affect this in any way (unless you get blown to bits and die - send in the clones!).

  5. Yeah, but then what? by Geaus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A large part of the attraction to MMORPGs for the core players is the ability to distinguish themselves from everyone else. By having the biggest level, the baddest weapons, the toughest armor or the most exotic clothing, if you compare two people who've been playing the game for two years next to two months, the person who's been playing for 2 years expects a little something to show for their time and effort.

    People absolutely get bored of fighting the same monster over and over again. I think reusing monster models for both high and low level content is an extremely easy way to shoot yourself in the foot. Variety in dungeon settings and monster types helps. And it helps even more when developers go with a theme that makes sense. Everquest had a Frog dungeon in a swamp, a haunted undead house tucked away on a bleak oceanside cliff, and an orc encampment on the border of elven territory. Good examples with good thought put into them. DAoC would have you fighting fire breathing lizards right next to undead barrow wights. Anarchy Online would have you fight a single mob type (heckler) for literally hundreds of hours to advance in level. Very bad examples there.

    As far as I can tell, there are two types of ways to distinguish players from one another. Time investment based and skill based. Mix them how you will, but those are your options. Either players are going to be rewarded for playing 2 hours a day more than everyone else as in most MMORPGs, or players are going to be rewarded for being just a little faster and a little more accurate as in most FPS games. Outside of PvP, I can't think of any MMORPGs that require any level of skill. Sure, there are some classes in some games, like the calmer or healer, that require a small bit of brain power, but thats a far cry from minutia of skill making a difference.

    So the trick of MMORPGs so far is to make the time sinks interesting. And thats accomplished with variety. Variety in monster, in dungeon, and the method of experience reward. Until we start seeing hybrid systems, where both player skill and character stats matter strongly (simliar to Deus Ex) then this is what we are stuck with.

    Though I am looking forward to the day when there is a good MMORPG that uses both stats and player ability, I suspect it's a long ways off.

    1. Re:Yeah, but then what? by Elsebet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Anarchy Online would have you fight a single mob type (heckler) for literally hundreds of hours to advance in level. Very bad examples there.

      *shakes cane*

      Damn youngins! Back in my day we did missions to level!

      :)

      --
      Sacré-bleu! Where is me mama?
  6. Advancement by DonCroco · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Advancement is one of the cornerstones i most MMOGs (if not all). Although you know you are just moving bytes on a server its still gives you a sense of achievement that for me (and i suspect many others) is very important. Although some games have tried "achievement reward" by making it possible to change the world somehow it has imo been with little succes. But as MMOGs are supposed to offer alot of playing time (today - i suspect someday there will be "short life" MMOGs) AND in the process give "achievement reward" there are bound to be stretches of playing time without rewards (or very small rewards). So imo the solution to the "grind" problem doesnt lie in the stat/skill/level system - the solution is to make the grind fun (imo to many MMOGs seems to have started with stat/level system, storyline and environment instead of focusing on what the players will be doing 90% of the time). Discussing different stat/skill/level strategies is ofcourse interrstion but i dont think anyone can be termend better than others - its highly game dependent. The one problem I think is very interresting regarding stat/skill/level strategies is how to make it possible for all players to play together regardless of "level" - and still being fun and rewarding for everyone.

  7. D&D is killing the computer RPG by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Why? Because Dungeon & Dragons is used while there is no need for it.

    What does D&D do exactly. It creates a ruleset for imaginary characters to behave in a fictional world. So it has rules stating that for each point of strength you have you can lift X amount of goods. That before you can do action X you need skills Y and Z. Nothing wrong with this being used in computer games right?

    Wrong. D&D does something else as well. It has carefully twisted and tweaked the rules to be playable with nothing more then a piece of paper a pencil and some dice. This means that the calculations used are kinda simplified, way more simple then a modern computer could handle. It would be like playing a modern flight simulator but for some reason restricting your self to a flight model wich can be calculated by hand. Why? We have a bloody computer. Doing complex math and keeping track of stats is what it does best. Let the CPU sweat.

    So if the D&D rules lost their pencil&paper&dice simplifications/optimizations then it would be perfect right?

    Wrong. D&D games have something a computer does not have. A sentient game controller. Even if dungeon master is using a boxed adventure he will/should have the capability to adjust the game on the fly to the party playing it. If the thief of the party isn't there any half decent game master will of course quickly add a way around a crucial lock. If a roll fails that is going to kill the adventure to early or a party fails to pick up a clue he will make a choice wether he had enough or to step in and help out. An extra NPC helping in a fight, a monster that stumbles. Or just cut things short if the party is getting bored. The computer has no such capability. It can't adjust the game because it will never detect the need for it.

    So if the ruleset started to make full use of the CPU capabilities and the game had godlike scripting to adjust the game to the player it would be good right?

    WRONG. D&D has yet one more difference. D&D is a social game, you play it in a group. It is the going on an adventure together that makes Pen&Paper RPG's fun. But it also means a lot of the rules are there to make everyone a "equal" member of the party. No super powerfull everything devastating wizards wiping the battlefield clean while the thief is running for his life from everything bigger then a rat. The most famous adventure party, the fellowship of the ring, would be hard to put in D&D rules. Exactly what is the problem with a healing thief. A sword wielding wizard? Why am I so restricted in my classes? Simple, so that I need the other players in my party. BUT computer games are solo afairs. I am the hero, I am the center of the story, the universe revolves around me! No need to play fair. If I want to stab someone with the biggest sword available and then pour magic into the wound like there is no tomorrow then let me.

    But no. Wizards don't sweep the battlefield. They can do 3-4 spells and then must go for a lie down. Constantly finding resting places. IS that supposed to be fun? I rarely use magic in D&D games. I prefer to kick ass.

    Get rid of the limits. Battles do not have to be balanced, the computer controlled NPC's are not going to suffer confidence crisises because my player character scores all the kills. Or even the other way around, let the beginner player character have the help of a more powerfull older master. You know to stop the annoying killed by rat syndrome.

    D&D has its uses but it is now more restraint on game development then an aid. One of my biggest peefs is that it shouts artificial. Take weapon skills. My character has totally mastered the long sword (one-handed) but if you put a short sword in his hands he has no idea wich end to hold. WTF? It is a bloody sword. Same with bows. Exactly how can someone master the long bow yet have no clue on how to use a short bow? Or going further. The art of using a bow involves working out flightpaths. A skill also needed in using a sling or a thr

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:D&D is killing the computer RPG by (trb001) · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Part of the dilemna is that most rules of real life contradict the first rule of video game design: If a feature detracts from the 'fun' aspect of a game, it's not a good feature.

      Exceptions are made for this rule...I think that WoW's resting is going to be a good thing, it will prohibit people from power leveling. You make some good points about weapon proficiency, things that I've often considered were bad as well...why can't prowess in long swords be applied to short shords, if not in full then partially? I don't know why games haven't done it yet, but shouldn't a class/subclass system of proficiency be used? i.e., you have a weapon proficiency, sword is a subclass of that, longsword is a subclass of that. Using a long sword gains you X proficiency points in longsword, X/2 in swords and X/4 in weapons.

      Anyways, a lot of simplification is done in games because the developers want the average Joe Sixpack to be able to play it. Anyone remember Ultima? Anyone remember having to remember or read from the manual the rune words for spells? In order to cast a spell, you had to mix specific ingredients for that spell ahead of time, then say the right words to cast it (In Flam was fireball, I think...Mas Flam was fire wind, or something along those lines).

      It certainly added a more complicated aspect to the game, but would a game embodying those aspects be popular now? Hell, games have all but done away with making the user map areas...I must have had 2 tablets of Bards Tale maps sitting around my house at one time.

      --trb

    2. Re:D&D is killing the computer RPG by mvdwege · · Score: 2, Informative
      why can't prowess in long swords be applied to short shords, if not in full then partially?

      You know, I was scratching my head as I read the parent, and you rephrasing his point makes me wonder even more.

      In D&D, at least in edition 3.0 and 3.5, this is exactly how weapons are portrayed. You need the basic proficiency (in simple, martial or exotic weapons) to handle the weapon. As long as you have proficiency in a weapon class, you can handle all weapons in that class equally well. Since both shortsword and longsword are martial weapons, anyone with the martial weapon proficiency gets to use them at no penalty.

      In order to differentiate the weapons, there are the feats. It makes sense to invest in feats such as Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization to increase your skill in the use of your primary weapon, and as a consequence, all other weapons in the class now operate at a relative penalty, thus mirroring the real-life effect (to a degree) of being good at using one weapon means being slightly less good at using a related weapon.

      So, in concluding, the D&D system already does what you and parent poster want. You may disagree with the implementation, but that's a disagreement on scale, not priniciple.

      Mart
      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
  8. Grinding sucks but ... by HalfFlat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... the alternatives don't yet seem viable.

    (Initial caveat: posting while drunk, apologies in advance.)

    Grinding is dull and pointless. It's a competition between players: who has the most patience? who has the least life outside a computer game? It was dull in LPMUDs and it's dull in the modern generation of online RPGs. There is more than enough tedium in the real world. Why on Earth do you want to do it in a game that is supposed to be fun?

    In every online game I've played or seen so far, one starts off being totally incompetent. The 'mangy rat' is a challenge. Who wants to play someone who has trouble dealing with mangy rats? Those who persist and reach the end-game are orders of magnitude more powerful. Their in-game skills are incomparably better than the starting character. This is their reward for sheer bloody-mindedness.

    Characters should develop and change over time, but they should start off being able to affect the world. To matter. To be someone. Otherwise it's either dull or a huge stretch of the imagination.

    Case in point: take City of Heroes. You play a superhero. Yet when you start you have 3 powers, which are probably two attacks and a defence. You then run fleeing from all but the most innocuous of petty street thugs. By the end of the game, one is fighting off alien invasions and world-destroying foes, but at the start you are decidedly un-heroic. No one can even fly until 14th level. And City of Heroes is one of the least bad offenders. What's with this?

    The big problem is that designing and implementing a world where people's online alter-egos can actually matter, is really hard. AI for the NPCs is not up to the task of creating a community in which the PC can shine, and it's unreasonable to expect a starting player to immediately make a splash in the community of other PCs. That coupled with possibly hundreds of thousands of players makes it especially difficult.

    Nonetheless, until people can feel like they matter, the MMORPG is going to have limited appeal. The policies against auto-leveling and other forms of programmatical advancement simply exclude another class of players who would rather a machine take care of all the tedious aspects so that they instead can concentrate on the bits worth playing. Why is it so bad that someone skip 17 hours of mindless clicking? Where is the appeal?

    Until AI tech and automated story-telling is vastly improved, MMORPGs seem stuck with this terrible grinding aspect. I'll play them as long as the other rewards make up for this huge deficiency, but the technology just isn't there yet to appeal to players who don't have a certain masochistic streak.

    One huge exception comes to mind: Yohoho! Puzzle Pirates. There your character doesn't improve, you improve. You the player get better at doing the puzzles, and your ability in the game improves conmesurably. This is extremely cool, and is one of the reasons why Y!PP is such a damn fine game.

  9. "weak" characters by truffle · · Score: 4, Interesting


    The concept that you start off fighting rats and snakes for a long time until you become "powerful" and can have fun fighting tough opponents is fundamentally flawed.

    What defines a powerful opponent? Is it their hit points, their armor class, their level? For most characters in most MMOs a powerful opponent is one more than a couple levels higher than them, since those opponents will be able to kill them very quickly.

    Perhaps it's just that "rats" are themselves boring, and don't seem powerful because they are rats. What this suggests is that it's important to pit players against interesting opponents at lower levels. There's nothing that prevents a low level monster from having all the characteristics of a higher level one, just at a lesser power to match that of the weaker character. There's nothing that forces the low level MMO game to be less fun than the high level.

    I'm not suggesting there are no problems with leveling based system, but that section of the article does not identify a fundamental flaw with leveling systems.

    --

    ---
    I support spreading santorum
  10. Whassa point of games that require leveling? by Bravo_Two_Zero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have lots of recovering Evercrack freinds (and a number who are still hooked). I still don't get the appeal of a game that would be so tedious at the lower levels that leveling is required. The only MMOG I play is Aces High. Version 2.0 will have a specific character that levels up depending on performance, and I'm not interested in that.

    The current 1.0 version puts virtual pilots in a big (or a mid-size historical) arena, where you sink or swim based on real, between-the-ears experience. There is a ranking system. You can join a squad, particularly if you show a willingness to do team work and grunt work (like flying C-47s to resupply fields and mobile units). You can fly some of the higher-powered aircraft if you earn perk points (based on landing kills, not just getting kills). Ironically, many of the top-tier pilots don't fly perk planes because they're seen as too easy.

    Newbies do get waxed every mission for the first week or two, but most players "get it" and start functioning as part of an official or ad-hoc team. Some don't, and that's fine. By and large, though, your experience is real, not something that can be automagically leveled without your intervention.

    I guess I just don't get the appeal of games that require that sort of behavior. And, the funny thing is that none of my Evercrack freinds really seem to like playing. It's some sort of preference, definitely. And, I'm not deriding it (the call it Evercrack... I just picked it it because that's a funny way of looking at it). I just don't get it.

    --


    Amateurs discuss tactics. Professionals discuss logistics.

  11. MMORPG could try an idea from sports. by hal2814 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think a good idea would be to separate players out into divisions and conferences.

    As a new player, you could start out in a low division, but then to go up a division, you would have to be eligible (be on-line for long enough) and also complete a set of tasks that show that you are a good enough player now to qualify for the next higher division. Maybe have some adventure (or set of adventures) that require certain quick-thinking and problem solving skills to prove that you are now a better player and good enough to move up divisions. Ther would probably have to be a mechanism for forcing players up a division in order to keep them from being a big fish in a small pond.

    A conference is formed to put certain players in direct competition with certain other players in the same division. You might not be the best guy on-line, but you could have a fair shot at being the best guy in your conference. This is not the same thing as a guild. A guild is typically more of a friendly establishment. Conference members are usually rivalries (think Georgia/Florida, Texas/Oklahoma, Ohio State/Michigan, etc).

    As you become a better player, you would be able to get into better conferences. In NCAA football (where I'm taking this example from), there is a vote amongst conference members to determine who can join or who gets kicked out of a conference. This happens because most conferences would want to be the l33t conference by having the best l33t players in it. Now the best way to determine which conference is better than which other conference is get those conferences to compete with each other on a regular basis.

    This system isn't perfect and it does require a good mechanism for competition amongst similarly qualified players, but I think it would be better than deciding who is best by who sits around and plays for hours on monotonous adventures just to get their level up.

  12. Ideas by Reapy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Offline advancment is basically progress quest. Again, it's trying to fix a flawed system.

    In an mmorpg, you need to differenciate yourself through looks and then somehow establish that you are better then other people. Or you just want your guy to look cool and kick ass.

    I don't mind level grinds, as long as I can progress to a new area with a new skill and technique to use on the next monsters in a timely fashion, I'm still having fun playing.

    But really what frusterates me about these games (besides the 15 a month AND expansion prices) is the problem with playing with people. Every game they say it is designed to be played with other people and force interaction. Great. I want to play with my friends. Too bad, you are level 30, they are just starting, you can't play together unless your friend plays by himself for a month.

    I tried for a time to get into the achaea mud. This was my first mud, but I relized that to do it, I had to pay even less attention to the real world around me then in the graphical games. The scrolling text takes a lot of attention to read.

    Anyway, they had some really interesting concepts there. The first of which is the status based pvp system. I didn't get far enough to really do anything in the game, but i read enough about it to get a feel for how it works. But there were a ton of status effects to inflict on people and a ton of ways to cure them. The way to kill someone off was to basically lock their status effects in such a way that they couldn't cure themselves and died from poison or something like that.

    So a pvp system like that would make a phenominal game. But then some people hate pvp and don't want to have anything to do with it.

    Another thing to implement, is to remove levels entirely. I get in the game, and I'm at max power. Basically I jump into everquest at level 65 or whatever the max is. Sort of like I bought a character on ebay. Except the game is massive, because all the content was designed around the idea that you have powerd up characters. Give me some skill points to allocate in the beginning to define a unique class or unique powers. Give me a lot of options for race and body type so I can look unique.

    Make the game about aquiring items. Make the game in such a way that to get items, it takes a lot of work. I want a troll hat. I have to go get the keys from the 4 surrounding goblin cheifs to get into the troll layer where I can get the troll hat. When I get the troll hat, it looks cool, and I can parade around with my badass troll hat.

    Give everyone a keyring that keeps track of areas they have unlocked. My avatar only has 3 of the 4 keys, the rest of my party has 4, but we need to get the 4th key for myself. But that's ok, because it's fun killing guys, and I don't ever see experience points anywhere. Give a way to change your class/skills, but make it take a long time.

    Basically I want a sandbox where I can try everything out. My reward to show how long i've been playing are cool looking powerful item. Maybe I can win the look of an item, then I can go capture spirits of monsters to put in to the item to give it unique powers.

    The thing that keeps me coming back to the mmorpgs are the fun of killing and exploring and interacting with people and improving my avatar. So why limit content and who I can play with and what skills I can use? Why don't you just give us all content that everybody can do, that is challenging and will require a group, and I can start playing with friends immediatly and forever.

    Just make sure that everythings challenging enough to do that you won't blow through it all in 40 hours.

  13. Ditch level/skill advancement by drekmonger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I hate level advancement for the sake of level advancement.

    You've worked a 10 hr week grinding away at killing rats, and have what? Woot, now you can grind away at orcs. And after that, maybe ogres, onwards until the mud/mmorpg runs out of content.

    Lame. Boring. Doesn't live up to the potential of the game.

    You've got thousands of people all playing the same game, but beyond an immediate group and the vendors most of those other players effect your character's personal world not one bit. You might as well be playing on a server with just 10 friends.

    Ditch level/skill advancement and replace it with social advancement. The whole idea of having a 120th level fighter/mage on a mmorpg instead of a solo game is so it can be compared with other players' characters.

    So make it official: social standing is the attribute improved via gameplay. Every meaningful action rises your character up a social ladder. Skills and powers stay in the same ballpark as a brand new character.

    Fights and other moments of excitment wouldn't be end-goal, just the obstacles. For example, you might gain standing in the Explorer's guild if you visit an espicially dangerous location. You'd also get standing via leading other players to these same special spots (which might be points of interest to their profession).

    You'd gain standing in the crafting guild by making a rare object...even a starting character would be able to build these rare objects if they have the tools and materials. The adventure would be finding the exotic materials and tools required to make the object. The character's who made the best object of type B (the best sword, the armor, etc.) would receive the most social points, and down the line from there.

    High social standing would give your character more access to the poltical aspects of the game, as well as perks. The top tier of the explorer's guild might recieve access to a cool mode of travel, for example.

  14. You Say You Want a Revolution? by MattW · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you're an MMORPG and you want a skill OR level based system, or a hybrid, you're going to have a hard time breaking new ground.

    Know what I'd sign up for? Q3 as an RPG.

    I spent like 18 months, maybe 2 years playing Q3. I started off bad. Challenging was finishing the same single player on the middle of 5 modes. Deathmatch online? Good luck... if I got lucky, I might manage to finish in the middle of the pack of 20+ players. (And I had superior hardware and bandwidth)

    But fast forward 18 months... and I'm at Quakecon in 2002, and I am delivering a spanking to the whole con. My railgun back-to-back hit-o-meter is popping up every few seconds (28...29...30 in a row) as I adjust to the LAN environment. *My* skills have improved enough that I'm dominating a 75-person server. (Actually, I was running slightly ahead of a guy I played with constantly of my 'main server' back at home, who was sitting right next to me)

    I've been playing City of Heroes lately. And frankly, I find it irritating that there's a lack of skill. If I play my tanker, I turn on my fiery aura, walk up to something, and spam my axe attack. Sure, in a big group taking on purples there's a little bit of strategic decision making, but it's obvious there's a pretty solid "ceiling" on where you can go with your own skill... and your own skill applies ~0 to your early progress, where the few powers you have available makes any decision making moot.

    CoH without a respec suffers additionally -- since if you learn from your mistakes building, you're currently forced to go through the grind again with a new build if you think it's better... that should be over come "Sep/Oct" when the 2nd update pack will introduce a respec, but still.

    If you played Q3, you may have run across a pro. Despite my LAN domination at Qcon, I wasn't one, and didn't nearly have the skills...yet. And it was the coolest thing. These guys had the aim, but they had the skills to make the most of it with other things like movement and strategy to gain the upperhand against you. That's how my games against pros typically went -- start off even, we each get some power ups. Maybe I get a frag or two early, but before long, I show up a second too late to grab some key item, and that's it... I never score again, and I'm ground into the dust. But you knew when you went up against these guys that they were better. They outplayed you.

    In City of Heroes, when some L50 flies along, it's clear he has a lot more time on his hands than you do... especially when you're me, without 10 hrs a day to play, and you're crushing the xp/hr rates that people report on the forums... and it's *still* "taking forever".

    Someone needs to come up with something that has the fun eye candy of CoH, but adds "player skill" to the "character skill". I'm not saying make Q3 into an MMORPG... why not just play Q3? But make player skill ACTUALLY count. Make attacks more powerful as you level up, but force players to actually AIM.

    It's going to come out sooner or later. And you know what? People aren't going to stop playing it. It's not going to get boring. Because when you stop and think: hell, it's been 3 hours and I've only got half a level?... you're going to realize your aim is improving. And you're going to smile and press on. (And it will make PvP a lot more interesting)

    1. Re:You Say You Want a Revolution? by ProfBooty · · Score: 2, Informative

      try planetside, it is pretty much what you are talking about, it is a fps with rpg elements, there are no bots, its all player versus player.

      its entertaining when you have a firefight with 150+ players, with aircraft, ground troops etc

      most people didnt like the lack of an economy, but it didnt bother me.

      everone has access to allthe skills at once, it is just that when you level up, you get more skill slots, dont like your guy as a stealthy ninja? turn in those slots and pick up skills to let youdrive a tank instead.

      id like it more if it had some npc bots or something when there arent too many people on the servers

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    2. Re:You Say You Want a Revolution? by Babbster · · Score: 5, Insightful
      It sounds to me like you just prefer FPS games to non-twitch RPG games. That's cool, but they're apples and oranges for a reason.

      I think your main point is invalid on its face. Specifically, you seem to denigrate the fact that to get to high levels in an MMORPG requires many, many hours of work while playing down the fact that in order to get "mad skillz" at Quake it takes many, many hours of practice. I could turn it around and complain that when I tried to play Quake 3 multiplayer I got my ass handed to me over and over again because other people had so much more time to dedicate to playing the game - since I don't have that kind of time, I can't enjoy Quake 3 online.

      Believe me, if the revolution is to turn MMORPGs into games more like first-person shooters, it's not going to expand the audience. It will simply eliminate the current audience and force the development of a new one.

    3. Re:You Say You Want a Revolution? by MattW · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you missed my point. I'm not disagreeing; both the FPS game and the MMORPG require huge time investments to get 'good'. The FPS game rewards you with better skills; you learn the nuances of the game, strategy with using weapons, etc, and combine that with learned reflexes. The MMORPG rewards your character. You gain xp, you go up levels.

      I want to take a little of the best of both games. The way I see it: no matter how much you practice at Q3, every game you're starting over. Even if you've won 10,000 1v1 matches against top pros in a row without ever getting fragged, the score is 0-0 and you get a random starting position. With the MMORPG, it's another completely different issue: you've played for years. You've got 5 characters at max level. You are the elite player in terms of world knowledge and build strategy. You create a new level 1 character... and you know what? You're more or less a newb again. This is especially true on City of Heroes, where your ability to hand down gear is ~nil, world knowledge counts for almost nothing (there are very few secrets to know, quests are given out in the most straightforward manner, etc -- BUILD knowledge counts, but not knowing the world; especially not early on), and you're lucky to be able to outperform a brand new character who picked the same AT and powersets as you by 10-20%.

      Thus I would propose a combination of sorts. An MMORPG where your character had certain powers and abilities, and even a newb with no twitch skills can aim and fire and grind it out... but where over time, if you end up with mad skillz, you could take the same character and significantly outperform. So you add both the 'twitch' skills (and I think that's a derogatory term; I'd rather call it reflexes or hand-eye) and the character development.

      Thus your character grows... and so do you as a player. Even if you start a new character, some chunk of your time spent playing the game is 'portable'; you gain from play.

      I think there's a whole set of people who won't like the idea. They want MMORPGs to be about tweaking their characters and grinding out their time. But I also think there's a big set of people who'd love to play a game where you could gain skill at playing while your character gains power. So some of the traditional MMORPG crowd will go away; some of the competitive FPS crowd will join in. And some new players might join the genre.

      There are some side advantages. Players will great skill can make the 'less ideal' types still playable through skill. PvP play takes on a whole new depths as you have no only types of characters facing off, but the skill and manner in which they're played matters, too.

      I'm going to have to look into Planetside and see how it plays; I'd heard of it, but had not heard it tried to incorporate the two play types.

      It sounds to me like you just prefer FPS games to non-twitch RPG games

      Actually, after I quit Q3 after the '02 quakecon, NWN had come out and I played that online pretty much as loyally as I'd played Q3. I'm actually an RPG fan from waaay back... infocom, SSI Goldbox, Ultima, etc... whereas Q3 was the only FPS I played after Duke Nukem came out.

      I've been fond of the single-player FPS RPGs -- Deux Ex and JKII being good examples of FPS play with RPG-like character development. I think a visionary development shop could merge the two and really have a game for the ages.

  15. Theres just no way... out of the level system by blahplusplus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Theres no way out of the 'level grind' system. It is the system entire genres are built upon and a gameplay convention thats fromulaic and financially successful. There is no other proven gameplay mechanic which has sold *single player games* as well as multiplayer games that has proven successful other then FPS.

    That is *the whole game*. Things that you can only 'consume once' like quests or games in which experience content too fast lose subscribes after the first few months without any content updates. Take a look at the types of games today. In each and every genre they boil down the player doing one of two things:

    1) Action/twitch interactivity (skill based) requiring your constant/immediate attention and practice to get better.

    2) Passive interaction with you turning on automatically controlled features of your character with little control over your avatar.

    3) Skill allocation and item finding/hunting.

    4) Goals and challenges that are fun and interesting *for a long time*. The for a long time part is the hard part. Everything suffers from the law familiarity and of diminishing returns even for 'fun' things.

    There is just no way to make a game fun for any length of time without some sort of goal or level system. Diablo II is probably the BEST example of a game where people are burnt the hell out but still play anyway. Why? Despite the fact that its free, item finding and making different builds with characters are pretty much the *only* reason you'd continue to play diablo II four or so years after release. The "phat loot" and gamling for better items are essentially the whole game now-adays. That is the only thing that draws people back is finding better stuff otherwise people would have stopped playing it ages ago after the first few weeks or months online.

    As a former FFXI player I vouch for the fact that MMO's pacing is too slow and too much of a timesink for most adult people who have jobs.