Why do mmorpgs have Vertical Progression?

Amiculi

eonowakb16_ESO wrote: »

spoqster wrote: »

So the objective for a horizontal progression system must be to provide players with that same feeling of power they get from a vertical system, only to give it to them via intellectual stimulation (pick the right skills for this boss) or encouragement to practice (this boss is level 20, you will never level past 20, now figure out how to beat him). The resulting feeling of power will be more real than the illusion that is given be the vertical system, and players will fall in love with that feeling and will come back wanting for more.

Nice post! And not harsh, it is the truth. But, and that may sound harsh, i doubt that the base of potential players that get a intellectual stimulation from beeing progressed vertically is so huge, compared to the one that prefer to have there progession measured in numbers - and if these numbers are just plain levels. You can manage a challange in ESO (if there would be one) with good skills, good gear a bit in the horizontal way. But - the majority wants to show there progression to the rest of the world through the number of a level. Thats might be the reason why so much were complaining in the past, that we dont have a way to inspect someone....

Horizontal Progression is really a misnomer. It's no progression.

Sure, you can fiddle with mechanics to get a build that functions but once you have that build, you're exactly the same as every other player no matter how much time you put into it. I guess people who enjoy vertical progression want something to show for their time.

I don't imagine many people who enjoy an RPG level system would find much pride in multiple prestiges in a CoD game, for example, because you don't really GET anything out of it.

The progression is largely pointless but it's a video game, what part of it is NOT pointless? Some people enjoy their pointless entertainment in their pointless lives to have some points. Experience points.

bloodravnb14_ESO

eonowakb16_ESO wrote: »

spoqster wrote: »

So the objective for a horizontal progression system must be to provide players with that same feeling of power they get from a vertical system, only to give it to them via intellectual stimulation (pick the right skills for this boss) or encouragement to practice (this boss is level 20, you will never level past 20, now figure out how to beat him). The resulting feeling of power will be more real than the illusion that is given be the vertical system, and players will fall in love with that feeling and will come back wanting for more.

Nice post! And not harsh, it is the truth. But, and that may sound harsh, i doubt that the base of potential players that get a intellectual stimulation from beeing progressed vertically is so huge, compared to the one that prefer to have there progession measured in numbers - and if these numbers are just plain levels. You can manage a challange in ESO (if there would be one) with good skills, good gear a bit in the horizontal way. But - the majority wants to show there progression to the rest of the world through the number of a level. Thats might be the reason why so much were complaining in the past, that we dont have a way to inspect someone....

This game already exists, it's called Guild Wars 2. Go play it. They even have on occasion done the "Intellectual stimulation" aspect. Sorry to say but it doesn't last. Liadri was an interesting boss, solo kill, and you pretty much had to execute the fight damn near perfect. You threw yourself at her, ironing out your strategy to eventually beat her, got your mini pet and that was that. You never fought her again, most people breathed a sigh of relief once they had her down so they didn't have to bang their head against a wall anymore. They got their reward, and they moved on.

I used to be a heavy advocate for horizontal progression until I finally experienced it, and it left everything feeling hollow and pointless. MMO's need that top 5%, they need people being more powerful than others. Maybe not levels, but certainly a form of vertical progression. It gives you something to strive for, something to shoot for even if your not going to be able to attain it. And honestly that's why I play MMO's over other games. if I wanted that other stuff I would play those types of games, not try to change a genre into something it's not meant to be.

Most of the people advocating for horizontal progress in this genre are game locusts, they descend, consume and destroy, and then leave. It's stupid to cater to them, because they won't actually stick around, which in an MMO is the entire point.

Gidorick

Mos-De-Atmo wrote: »

What actually is horizontal progression specifically?

Check out this thread: http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/192948/what-is-horizontal-progression/p1

RazzPitazz wrote: »

Carrots on sticks

This is pretty much it. Full stop.

ALL games could be designed with absolutely ZERO progression. Is there any reason to not just give every player a selection of points in the beginning of the game and then make every single mob/boss/whatever able to be fought and beat off of those set of skills.

Of course quests objectives could also be laid out in a line right next to one another so you can just click-click-click-click-WIN!

This is the difference between game design that gives us this:

Arena

and game design that gives us this:

ESO

Vertical progression gives us something to do while we play the game. Some players enjoy progression enough so much that to THEM, it IS the game. Some players prefer questing and story.

Sure an MMO can be designed without vertical progression but NOT The Elder Scrolls Online. leveling, skills, getting stronger is a vital part of the experience. It's fine if you want to argue that perhaps we don't need vertical progression anymore in modern games... but do not try to justify its removal from ESO.

Dahkoht

I like progression in an mmo. In any RPG for that matter. Always have back to AD&D tabletop days.


Also progression is progression.

You can dress it up however you want , call it horizontal or vertical or sideways with a twist and cherry on top , it's the same.

The Secret World make a big deal about "no levels" for example.

I assure you , there are levels in TSW , just not called levels.

Faugaun

bloodravnb14_ESO wrote: »

eonowakb16_ESO wrote: »

spoqster wrote: »

So the objective for a horizontal progression system must be to provide players with that same feeling of power they get from a vertical system, only to give it to them via intellectual stimulation (pick the right skills for this boss) or encouragement to practice (this boss is level 20, you will never level past 20, now figure out how to beat him). The resulting feeling of power will be more real than the illusion that is given be the vertical system, and players will fall in love with that feeling and will come back wanting for more.

Nice post! And not harsh, it is the truth. But, and that may sound harsh, i doubt that the base of potential players that get a intellectual stimulation from beeing progressed vertically is so huge, compared to the one that prefer to have there progession measured in numbers - and if these numbers are just plain levels. You can manage a challange in ESO (if there would be one) with good skills, good gear a bit in the horizontal way. But - the majority wants to show there progression to the rest of the world through the number of a level. Thats might be the reason why so much were complaining in the past, that we dont have a way to inspect someone....

This game already exists, it's called Guild Wars 2. Go play it. They even have on occasion done the "Intellectual stimulation" aspect. Sorry to say but it doesn't last. Liadri was an interesting boss, solo kill, and you pretty much had to execute the fight damn near perfect. You threw yourself at her, ironing out your strategy to eventually beat her, got your mini pet and that was that. You never fought her again, most people breathed a sigh of relief once they had her down so they didn't have to bang their head against a wall anymore. They got their reward, and they moved on.

I used to be a heavy advocate for horizontal progression until I finally experienced it, and it left everything feeling hollow and pointless. MMO's need that top 5%, they need people being more powerful than others. Maybe not levels, but certainly a form of vertical progression. It gives you something to strive for, something to shoot for even if your not going to be able to attain it. And honestly that's why I play MMO's over other games. if I wanted that other stuff I would play those types of games, not try to change a genre into something it's not meant to be.

Most of the people advocating for horizontal progress in this genre are game locusts, they descend, consume and destroy, and then leave. It's stupid to cater to them, because they won't actually stick around, which in an MMO is the entire point.

that's an awful lot of assumptions and very little added to the conversation .... I played the secret world which had a wonderful horizontal progression system, never played GW2 so cannot speak for that game. I am not a content locust. Now getting to your one point which adds to the conversation it sounds like you (and likely another portion of the game population) need others to be ahead in order to motivate you to improve your game.

Ok I'll give you that point, a vertical progression system will almost certainly put someone better than you to set as a goal. However, a horizontal system with timed runs and competitive leaderboards can provide this same stimulation without the apparently lacking in value vertical progression system.

Faugaun

Dahkoht wrote: »

I like progression in an mmo. In any RPG for that matter. Always have back to AD&D tabletop days.


Also progression is progression.

You can dress it up however you want , call it horizontal or vertical or sideways with a twist and cherry on top , it's the same.

The Secret World make a big deal about "no levels" for example.

I assure you , there are levels in TSW , just not called levels.

No there were not levels in TSW now you are inventing things. Yes you gained something similar to experience and that was used to purchase abilities but gaining abilities and vertical progression from levelling are completely different things.

@Gidorick I don't think anyone was advocating a game with Zero progression. As for whether ESO needs vertical progression or not that is for the devs to determine. Twice now they have given us post level 50 vertical grinds and three times they have extended one of those grinds. I think your desires are safe fro the time being my friend . I'm not sure what ESO needs personally but I really like the world and want to see it succeed so I hope whatever the devs decide is the best course of action.

Kuroinu

Vertical progression is in almost every game in some form or another. Today's MMOs are...and I hate this phrase and using it...dumbed down. I played FFXI for a long time at end game; even before the lvl cap was raised above 75. The only reason I eventually quit was that most of my friends were busy and just didn't have the time anymore.

So to get right to the point, FFXI had a battle/gear system wherein you could change all 15~16 gear slots at once and at any time. Many items in the game were also worth holding onto regardless of level because they offered unique bonuses that when equipped would boost certain abilities; you'd use it just for the boost and then switch it out for something else. And yes this, depending on job, would cause a lot of inventory problems but it was still worth it and was one of the things that kept me interested for so long. Just creating gear sets for different situations was a lot of fun, not to mention you could play 20 jobs on one character, lol.

Waylander

I would hazard a guess that progression in MMO's is due to the basic psychology of happiness.

People are generally most happy when they feel they are achieving something. This sense of achievement is typically through progression and can be at work, socially, in health and fitness or in games.

Gidorick

Sorry @Faugaun. I re-read my post and it comes across WAAAY more b*tchy than I intended it to! hehe.

I was going to the extreme to make the point that the point of levels is to have levels. no game NEEDS levels. They are simply an aspect of gameplay.

I actually don't care about progression. To ME progression is the thing that happens as I play. It's never a goal in and of itself, which is kind of weird because I'm working on concept to suggest progression for the sake of progression... but that should wait for that post.

Kuroinu

Waylander wrote: »

I would hazard a guess that progression in MMO's is due to the basic psychology of happiness.

People are generally most happy when they feel they are achieving something. This sense of achievement is typically through progression and can be at work, socially, in health and fitness or in games.

But when you figure out that this is how it works and/or is always going to work then it becomes very, very boring. At least in my opinion, I hate being able to predict that the next level of gear is going to be "this amount" with "that stat" and I need to get "this gear" to successfully complete "that content". It's so disgusting, lol. There are many better ways of going about keeping players interested too, it's such a shame when an MMO adopts that type of system. FFXIV has this system and it's one of the main reasons I quit, it was just too boring.

Yolokin_Swagonborn

Vertical Progression is just number inflation.

Horizontal progression (if done correctly) has another name, Content. People want actual content. If all the things that were promised to us at quakecon were coming out in a new patch, I guarantee you NO ONE would be having this silly argument or throwing around these potentially confusing and vague terms.

If you want an example of a game with amazing Vertical Progression, play Cookie Clicker. With the right upgrades, your CPS (cookies per second) can get quite high. At some point, you cease to be amused by the craptillion cookies you can crank out and stop playing.

In ESO when you finally reach V16 you will get higher character stats, gear with better stats, your DPS gets higher etc. But the monsters at that level have the mathematical inflated equivalent of the previous level monsters you were fighting an hour ago before you leveled. SUCH PROGRESSION. MUCH ADVANCE. WOW SO MANY COOKIES!!!

Now, imagine if you went to a new zone, lets say, Imperial City or Orsinium or Clockwork City. All the enemies are V14. Piece of cake you say. You see a mob in front of you and engage. Suddenly that Imperial Daedra dodges out of the way. Wait a minute, normal cookie cutter mobs dont do that. He calls for help and you look around, you glance up to see a daedric archer in a nearby broken window, you have just enough time to dodge yourself before an arrow strikes the ground by your feet. You run away hoping that the mobs will just snap back, and forget about you. They don't. They advance slowly and start patrolling for you...

Now wouldn't the second suggestion be more fun? More challenging mobs (due to different programming and mechanics), not just higher stats. That is called ACTUAL CONTENT. Having a new skill line, and new skills to use would also be great "progression." But, as someone will inevitably point out, that takes actual effort, programming skill, and planning. Much easier to just increase your level and the amount of cookies you can bake per second while simultaneously increasing how many cookies are eaten per second by what ever cookie monster you are fighting.

Gidorick

You're right @Yolokin_Swagonborn. These threads are more a symptom of lack of content more than anything else. Astute observation old-boy.

More story, more content, more complex systems are all much more difficult than adding +X% to player stats.... I agree that progression =/= content but I think progression>no content.

Faugaun

Gidorick wrote: »

Sorry @Faugaun. I re-read my post and it comes across WAAAY more b*tchy than I intended it to! hehe.

I was going to the extreme to make the point that the point of levels is to have levels. no game NEEDS levels. They are simply an aspect of gameplay.

I actually don't care about progression. To ME progression is the thing that happens as I play. It's never a goal in and of itself, which is kind of weird because I'm working on concept to suggest progression for the sake of progression... but that should wait for that post.

No worries mate! We all get exited about our own opinions at times. No previews on your new concept ehh.... dang. lol

Violynne

Many moons ago, we worked on a game with two distinct play styles: vertical progression and branching. Both were identical games in terms of content, quests, and rewards, but we wanted to see how players would react.

It wasn't a large game, completed within a few hours, but the true point was to measure satisfaction.

In the branch game, a player's choice dictated the game's final stages. If player did "X", then a path would open up and close another. Through the game, players could easily pick up buffs to meet the game's growing difficulty.

In the vertical progression, buffs were only given as drops, where mini-bosses would give better weapons. The game was set on the paths we had created, but were fixed, so if a player did "X", they could only go on one path.

When released to a closed audience (about 1500 gamers, if memory serves), the feedback was quite striking. The majority of people preferred the vertical progression, because they felt they "earned" the rewards, rather than finding them lying about.

At the time, one of the biggest requests was a game which molded on player action, but clearly what they thought they wanted wasn't what they felt fun to play. There's a reason why major publishers have psychologists available for their professional "advice" (to push addiction).

The video above absolutely nailed it. Today's publishers aren't about making good games. They're about making addictive games. TESO is, by its very definition, an addictive game. Players will feel tired of doing the same type of quests over and over, but they can't seem to stop doing them. "Just one more quest, just a few more mats, and then I'll be stronger!"

There is a downside to this, and that is age does play a factor. This addictive nature is absolutely geared toward younger players, as older players tend to burn out much faster (this comes from experience in playing the same games for decades). Older players, who actually have the money, don't fall for the ruse as easily, but they'll be more than happy to buy the game for their young players.

There's nothing inherently wrong with vertical progression, as games are designed to give a "winning" feel, but I concur with the video when companies are deliberately focusing on getting players to "throw money at the screen".

It's one thing where a game earns its reputation by word of mouth from other gamers. Then there's Destiny, and because of its success, is a terrifying realization this can become the new game model of the future.

If that happens, gaming as you know it will be gone for a very long time.

I enjoyed Destiny when it came out. I was ticked when The Dark Below destroyed that feeling, and even more ticked when House of Wolves was their "attempt" at "listening" to its gamers, but there is absolutely no mistaking this game was developed intentionally to pull people in. It's literally impossible to have HoW "fix" TDB's isues within the half year. The player hate was all part of their model. They knew TDB's system would tick people off just as they knew HoW would smooth things over.

TTK is the new TDB, and many are going to be suckered by it. If you despise this model, regardless how much you enjoy Destiny, I strongly urge you to resist "throwing money at the screen" (especially for the insulting $20 price tag for 3 new emotes). But it's your money, you do with it what you want.

Just don't come back years from now complaining why every other company is doing the same thing.

Oh, and I'll close with this: if you're wondering why we didn't combine the two games, it's because it's very difficult to do. By presenting both a vertical progression and a branch system, things often break and no amount of testing can catch every bug. That, and I left the industry a few months after that. Playing games is much more rewarding than making them.