Sallington wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

An RPG without gear? Sounds awful. I suppose it could work if you had a skill tree system diverse enough to allow for enough different playstyles without the need for gear.

That does sound wonderful, yes.
I absolutely wouldn't mind diverse and fluid abilities, where leveling them takes about as long as it does to learn how to use the abilities you have before taking on more. This varies from person to person so perhaps it could be 'trial' based (skill check) or ELO based (rating system)
To me this would create a much more ultimate PVP system, and if the top 1% level raids were challenging enough, they could be enjoyable achievements as pure skill tests, and not gear checks.

You could still get awesome rewards like beautiful exclusive mounts, titles no one else can get, polymorphs/costumes, secret hair styles, different recipes and motifs (to make costumes), etc etc etc

AugustoCP wrote: »

RPGs have always been about working hard to upgrade your character

This is the part of the game which is not a "game" to me, it is boring and tedious. It was never about this to me, that's something I felt "obligated" to do in order to be competitive and for no other reason. It was never fun, at all. Ever.
I don't want to "work hard" I work hard all day, I want to have fun and compete with other people to be the best player.

@AugustoCP Raising the skill cap works against casuals since hardcore players will dominate that much more.

I like to use chess as an example quite often, chess has such a high skill cap that no one will reach it in a human lifetime. Do you think chess favors casual players? Your thinking is broken in some fundamental way that I can't understand.

I think a lot of people miss the point of an RPG. Even in Zelda where there are no levels the equipment you get along the way is your "level". You run into enemies you strictly cannot beat without a certain item (bomb, bow, hookshot, water flippers, etc..)

The idea, the fantasy, of an RPG is starting out as a nobody with a stick. Then you find a sword. Then you find a better sword, and you get a little better at fighting. You go from zero to hero. You don't start out as Conan and kill 20 men single-handedly. You start out as the green-horn and grow into Conan the Destroyer.

The point, the fantasy, of a role-playing game is assuming the role of a hero who starts out small and weak and overcomes challenges gaining experience and knowledge and wisdom and growing in strength, stature and power. The novice book-worm who knows a single spell grows into Gandalf or Medivh or Merlin - an ArchMage to be respected and feared.

It's the story of the young farmer who is taken in by a Jedi master and learns to harness a power beyond his understanding and grow into a powerful Jedi.

This is shown in games as levels, gear, skills, feats, etc... You start with little and eventually gain much. The fun is in watching your nobody become somebody. People somehow have lost sight of this.

If you don't want levels, challenge, growth, adventure, combat and magic...go play IMVU or Furcadia. I think you're looking for an online graphical chat-room rather than a role-playing game. Other-wise what is your role? Who are you role playing as?

I think that this is the first game in history that level the player to content.

In Skyrim and other RPGs, the content is leveled to player, like dungeons in this game. Same with loot. It is actually a good system and is well implemented in Skyrim, at least for me.

But altering player stats? It is a RPG. You have to level you character, learn skills, become more powerful so you can fight against harder things. Even for DLCs is just stupid.

Ravinsild wrote: »

This is shown in games as levels, gear, skills, feats, etc... You start with little and eventually gain much. The fun is in watching your nobody become somebody. People somehow have lost sight of this.

Are we arguing about vertical vs horizontal progression ...if any...
..or the ability to go anywhere with anyone of any experience level ?
Because this thread has made it clear that its an intwined rats nest that needs a resolution.

Progression ..what is it ?
The ability to make us feel superior to how we were before.
By extension.. the ability for veteran players to feel superior to the new player (that we started as).
Leading to the inevitable equation in twisted minds that
Veteran players > New players.
ie Progression is used as a justification for making new players prey for veterans using bigotry of the worst kind to make such new players feel inferior and alienated.
Rather than progression being a sense of personal achievement. It becomes a stick to whack other new players with.

It is then used as an excuse for creating ever higher and ever harder barriers to deny the newest players access to new content without an ever increasing amount of time invested in the game.
ie Power gaps develop that become insurmountable leading to new players leaving as soon as they apprehend the monstrosity of the task before them.
The inevitable result of which is fewer new players start.
The worse of the aged players leave as they get fed up with being prey or finding the difficulty raised too high.
Until all that remains is the top dogs with the game all to themselves.
The content is scaled much harder to satisfy this limited playerbase, thus ensuring the game is unplayable to new players and the game dies through lack of funding (ie players).

That is the inevitable conclusion of vertical progression.
This lead directly to WoW and such giving instant max level in store because they let the powergap generated by vertical progression alienate new players.
New players saw the road ahead.....and simply walked away.

Is progression a bad thing ?
I guess it depends if you are giving one player a gun in a knife fight.
The guy with the gun always wins unless everyone else gets guns.
Then you have that powergap developing again.
But then the guy with the gun gets bored and demands more advancement as he is special and shouldnt be equal.
So he gets a grenade......and on it goes.
We progress from knife > gun > grenade.
Yet the new player is stuck with the knife.
You could remove the knife from circulation and start with guns (ie make knife obsolete).
But then you have removed 1/3rd of your content (knifeplay) from the game.

So yes. IMHO vertical progression is an unsustainable arms race, that creates an ever growing powergap, that was never envisioned when the game was balanced around new players. It is thus new player unfriendly. And new player unfriendly is suicide for any sustainable game.
You could range limit content so the range becomes ever higher and the highest never outperform the lowest beyond a certain limit.
But then you are still left with the problem of the lowest content being dropped or becoming obsolete.
A never ending demand for the creation of new content to replace that which was lost.
So the playtime available always remains the same instead of expanding...no matter the financial investment.

Can there be progress other than game suicide vertical progression ?
This is the concept of horizontal progression which I find ironic, as it is the design basis of Camelot Unchained.
You dont give people power....you give people options and variety.
You dont give people power....you give them achievements and objectives.
That way it doesnt matter how old the game is, the game always remains 100% accessable to all new players and old players.
100% of the ever expanding game is compatible with all players of all levels at all times (Inclusive)
vs.
x% of the shrinking game is compatible with some players of some levels at some times (Exclusive)

Is Levelling a requirement ?
Levelling always used to be synonymous with attribute points.
Allocating attribute points were used to define/focus/specialise your character (horizontal progression).
Traditionally levels directly improved your power level too (vertical progression).
So for me the 1-50 process was all about both empowering and defining the character until you hit level 50.
At level 50 you hit endgame content and that content should have been accessable to 'everyone'.
To be accessable to everyone implies vertical progression stops at that point....otherwise the content becomes unaccessable via powergaps.

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Are we arguing about vertical vs horizontal progression ...if any...
..or the ability to go anywhere with anyone of any experience level ?
Because this thread has made it clear that its an intwined rats nest that needs a resolution.

Progression ..what is it ?
The ability to make us feel superior to how we were before.
By extension.. the ability for veteran players to feel superior to the new player (that we started as).
Leading to the inevitable equation in twisted minds that
Veteran players > New players.
ie Progression is used as a justification for making new players prey for veterans using bigotry of the worst kind to make such new players feel inferior and alienated.
Rather than progression being a sense of personal achievement. It becomes a stick to whack other new players with.

It is then used as an excuse for creating ever higher and ever harder barriers to deny the newest players access to new content without an ever increasing amount of time invested in the game.
ie Power gaps develop that become insurmountable leading to new players leaving as soon as they apprehend the monstrosity of the task before them.
The inevitable result of which is fewer new players start.
The worse of the aged players leave as they get fed up with being prey or finding the difficulty raised too high.
Until all that remains is the top dogs with the game all to themselves.
The content is scaled much harder to satisfy this limited playerbase, thus ensuring the game is unplayable to new players and the game dies through lack of funding (ie players).

That is the inevitable conclusion of vertical progression.
This lead directly to WoW and such giving instant max level in store because they let the powergap generated by vertical progression alienate new players.
New players saw the road ahead.....and simply walked away.

Is progression a bad thing ?
I guess it depends if you are giving one player a gun in a knife fight.
The guy with the gun always wins unless everyone else gets guns.
Then you have that powergap developing again.
But then the guy with the gun gets bored and demands more advancement as he is special and shouldnt be equal.
So he gets a grenade......and on it goes.
We progress from knife > gun > grenade.
Yet the new player is stuck with the knife.
You could remove the knife from circulation and start with guns (ie make knife obsolete).
But then you have removed 1/3rd of your content (knifeplay) from the game.

So yes. IMHO vertical progression is an unsustainable arms race, that creates an ever growing powergap, that was never envisioned when the game was balanced around new players. It is thus new player unfriendly. And new player unfriendly is suicide for any sustainable game.
You could range limit content so the range becomes ever higher and the highest never outperform the lowest beyond a certain limit.
But then you are still left with the problem of the lowest content being dropped or becoming obsolete.
A never ending demand for the creation of new content to replace that which was lost.
So the playtime available always remains the same instead of expanding...no matter the financial investment.

Can there be progress other than game suicide vertical progression ?
This is the concept of horizontal progression which I find ironic, as it is the design basis of Camelot Unchained.
You dont give people power....you give people options and variety.
You dont give people power....you give them achievements and objectives.
That way it doesnt matter how old the game is, the game always remains 100% accessable to all new players and old players.
100% of the ever expanding game is compatible with all players of all levels at all times
vs.
x% of the shrinking game is compatible with some players of some levels at some times

Is Levelling a requirement ?
Levelling always used to be synonymous with attribute points.
Allocating attribute points were used to define/focus/specialise your character (horizontal progression).
Traditionally levels directly improved your power level too (vertical progression).
So for me the 1-50 process was all about both empowering and defining the character until you hit level 50.
At level 50 you hit endgame content and that content should have been accessable to 'everyone'.
To be accessable to everyone implies vertical progression stops at that point....otherwise the content becomes unaccessable via powergaps.

Alternatively the "powergap" as you call it can be incentive to play as you eventually want to reach those heights yourself. You make it accessible yourself by obtaining the power to defeat it. Some people call it a "carrot on a stick" but the concept is just goals to overcome. Harder, stronger, bigger, badder badguys. Much like DragonBall - Super...he can barely fart out a KameHameHa in the beginning....and by Super Goku is a Super Saiya-jin God Super Saiya-jin that can fight deities and fart entire planets out of existence. He grew, and overcame more and more difficult opponents and challenges and kept upgrading his skills and power...

Player characters gain more power typically through stronger gear they equip - because after you have all the skills mastered, all the achievements completed, all the vanity pets collected...the lure of overcoming the next boss for the stronger gear and enjoying the defeating of those obstacles is what keeps people playing.

All content all accessible all of the time to everyone with no upward trajectory is basically an online graphical chat room. There isn't really any game play. There's nothing to overcome or defeat. Which is why I quit Guild Wars 1 and 2 quickly after level cap. There was nothing to keep me playing. I got all the cosmetics and achievements I wanted and they never made anything more difficult or stronger to do.

Edit: People do this in real life too - chasing the latest iPhone, the latest fashion trends, newer suits, better cars, more status, more wealth, more displays of power. In this game you literally start with rags and chains...you look like a run-away slave. You eventually get beautiful, ornate, gem-stone encrusted plate-male with fanciful embroidered swords or mighty flowing robes...

Tonnopesceb16_ESO wrote: »

I can add little to nothing to this thread, but all i can say is that i don't dislike the idea of one tamriel, but i hope that zos will implement it with a rpg game in mind.

Even Skyrim works in a similar way, the content scale to the player (Since eso is a mmo is easier to scale the players) but there is always something that requires to have a higher level, a boss a specific instance or a random hyper dragon, the ebony warrior that one shot the player if under max level.
Adding something really difficult to every zone can help the players feel the need to level a bit more or change the gear.

For eso this can be the dolmens or the world bosses that are already in game without changing everything.

Bad english as usual, and the Phone is not helping me....

Adding roaming patrolling turbo mobs like Fel Reavers would be fun Just a giant monster that can one shot you unless you level up! It could drop cool lot or motifs or something.

Tonnopesceb16_ESO wrote: »

I can add little to nothing to this thread, but all i can say is that i don't dislike the idea of one tamriel, but i hope that zos will implement it with a rpg game in mind.

Even Skyrim works in a similar way, the content scale to the player (Since eso is a mmo is easier to scale the players) but there is always something that requires to have a higher level, a boss a specific instance or a random hyper dragon, the ebony warrior that one shot the player if under max level.
Adding something really difficult to every zone can help the players feel the need to level a bit more or change the gear.

For eso this can be the dolmens or the world bosses that are already in game without changing everything.

Bad english as usual, and the Phone is not helping me....

I just use your quote to cite what i think is the general problem here. so don't take this personal, it's a general thing...

skyrim = rpg
eso = mmorpg

i get the feeling here that a lot of rpg players are complaining about the mmo aspect of the game... sorry, but how about looking for another rpg like the witcher? i bet you'll have more fun...

Tonnopesceb16_ESO wrote: »

I can add little to nothing to this thread, but all i can say is that i don't dislike the idea of one tamriel, but i hope that zos will implement it with a rpg game in mind.

Even Skyrim works in a similar way, the content scale to the player (Since eso is a mmo is easier to scale the players) but there is always something that requires to have a higher level, a boss a specific instance or a random hyper dragon, the ebony warrior that one shot the player if under max level.
Adding something really difficult to every zone can help the players feel the need to level a bit more or change the gear.

For eso this can be the dolmens or the world bosses that are already in game without changing everything.

Bad english as usual, and the Phone is not helping me....

They are going to level player to content, not content to player.

Selique wrote: »

I don't understand why a Leveling system has to be an important part of being an MMO? Can't you progress without it? Innovation in MMO's is something we need, not sticking to the same old recipe which makes the genre boring.

Skills still have levels and meaning. Gear still has CP requirements. Trials still have CP requirements. Who cares what number you have next to your name? What does it matter?

This change is for the better. I personally welcome it with open arms.

It's the sense of accomplishment and knowing your efforts actually MEAN something. Now they don't because we are all virtually the same always. It's as has been stated: it's like using god mode to go anywhere immediately and not be challenged by the enemies there. Even Skyrim had places that were tougher than others... Also as has been said they may as well remove levels and replace it with our CPs. Levels are nothing more than a gear requirement now. On that note Kresh, Ironthread, Silverweave, Topgrain Hide, Iron Hide, Superb Hide, Calcinium, Galatite, Quicksilver, Birch, Ash, and Mahogany are all virtually useless ever since VR was removed.

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

Without the traditional aspect of almost every RPG in existance both single and multiplayer all you have is... well you might as well go play COD or something. Oh, wait, even THEY have SOME form of acquired gear.

AugustoCP wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

An RPG without gear? Sounds awful. I suppose it could work if you had a skill tree system diverse enough to allow for enough different playstyles without the need for gear.

That does sound wonderful, yes.
I absolutely wouldn't mind diverse and fluid abilities, where leveling them takes about as long as it does to learn how to use the abilities you have before taking on more. This varies from person to person so perhaps it could be 'trial' based (skill check) or ELO based (rating system)
To me this would create a much more ultimate PVP system, and if the top 1% level raids were challenging enough, they could be enjoyable achievements as pure skill tests, and not gear checks.

You could still get awesome rewards like beautiful exclusive mounts, titles no one else can get, polymorphs/costumes, secret hair styles, different recipes and motifs (to make costumes), etc etc etc

AugustoCP wrote: »

RPGs have always been about working hard to upgrade your character

This is the part of the game which is not a "game" to me, it is boring and tedious. It was never about this to me, that's something I felt "obligated" to do in order to be competitive and for no other reason. It was never fun, at all. Ever.
I don't want to "work hard" I work hard all day, I want to have fun and compete with other people to be the best player.

In RPGs, the competition is indeed real, and a very serious thing. But the way you become the best is by doing theorycrafting, calculating how to get the best DPS/HPS, testing out new gear combinations, and FARMING them. What you want is having everything handed to you. You might want to leave the RPG genre as a whole.


This might be tedious for you, but certainy not for us RPG fans: This isn't PART of the game for us, this IS the game.


tl;dr Go back to Candy Crush, you filthy casual.

You can prove your point without being stereotypical. I'm a casual player and I play RPGs for what they are... In fact, classic RPGs were actually casual friendly with turn-based combat and stuff.

Ravinsild wrote: »

I think a lot of people miss the point of an RPG. Even in Zelda where there are no levels the equipment you get along the way is your "level". You run into enemies you strictly cannot beat without a certain item (bomb, bow, hookshot, water flippers, etc..)

The idea, the fantasy, of an RPG is starting out as a nobody with a stick. Then you find a sword. Then you find a better sword, and you get a little better at fighting. You go from zero to hero. You don't start out as Conan and kill 20 men single-handedly. You start out as the green-horn and grow into Conan the Destroyer.

The point, the fantasy, of a role-playing game is assuming the role of a hero who starts out small and weak and overcomes challenges gaining experience and knowledge and wisdom and growing in strength, stature and power. The novice book-worm who knows a single spell grows into Gandalf or Medivh or Merlin - an ArchMage to be respected and feared.

It's the story of the young farmer who is taken in by a Jedi master and learns to harness a power beyond his understanding and grow into a powerful Jedi.

This is shown in games as levels, gear, skills, feats, etc... You start with little and eventually gain much. The fun is in watching your nobody become somebody. People somehow have lost sight of this.

If you don't want levels, challenge, growth, adventure, combat and magic...go play IMVU or Furcadia. I think you're looking for an online graphical chat-room rather than a role-playing game. Other-wise what is your role? Who are you role playing as?

Zelda 2: Link's Adventure actually did have a form of Level System in the form of earning XP Points and upgrading stats with them. You are right though; not all RPGs have a Level System, but most do. Also LoZ is more of a puzzle-solving action RPG than anything.

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

Selique wrote: »

I don't understand why a Leveling system has to be an important part of being an MMO? Can't you progress without it? Innovation in MMO's is something we need, not sticking to the same old recipe which makes the genre boring.

Skills still have levels and meaning. Gear still has CP requirements. Trials still have CP requirements. Who cares what number you have next to your name? What does it matter?

This change is for the better. I personally welcome it with open arms.

It's the sense of accomplishment and knowing your efforts actually MEAN something. Now they don't because we are all virtually the same always. It's as has been stated: it's like using god mode to go anywhere immediately and not be challenged by the enemies there. Even Skyrim had places that were tougher than others... Also as has been said they may as well remove levels and replace it with our CPs. Levels are nothing more than a gear requirement now. On that note Kresh, Ironthread, Silverweave, Topgrain Hide, Iron Hide, Superb Hide, Calcinium, Galatite, Quicksilver, Birch, Ash, and Mahogany are all virtually useless ever since VR was removed.

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

Without the traditional aspect of almost every RPG in existance both single and multiplayer all you have is... well you might as well go play COD or something. Oh, wait, even THEY have SOME form of acquired gear.

AugustoCP wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

An RPG without gear? Sounds awful. I suppose it could work if you had a skill tree system diverse enough to allow for enough different playstyles without the need for gear.

That does sound wonderful, yes.
I absolutely wouldn't mind diverse and fluid abilities, where leveling them takes about as long as it does to learn how to use the abilities you have before taking on more. This varies from person to person so perhaps it could be 'trial' based (skill check) or ELO based (rating system)
To me this would create a much more ultimate PVP system, and if the top 1% level raids were challenging enough, they could be enjoyable achievements as pure skill tests, and not gear checks.

You could still get awesome rewards like beautiful exclusive mounts, titles no one else can get, polymorphs/costumes, secret hair styles, different recipes and motifs (to make costumes), etc etc etc

AugustoCP wrote: »

RPGs have always been about working hard to upgrade your character

This is the part of the game which is not a "game" to me, it is boring and tedious. It was never about this to me, that's something I felt "obligated" to do in order to be competitive and for no other reason. It was never fun, at all. Ever.
I don't want to "work hard" I work hard all day, I want to have fun and compete with other people to be the best player.

In RPGs, the competition is indeed real, and a very serious thing. But the way you become the best is by doing theorycrafting, calculating how to get the best DPS/HPS, testing out new gear combinations, and FARMING them. What you want is having everything handed to you. You might want to leave the RPG genre as a whole.


This might be tedious for you, but certainy not for us RPG fans: This isn't PART of the game for us, this IS the game.


tl;dr Go back to Candy Crush, you filthy casual.

You can prove your point without being stereotypical. I'm a casual player and I play RPGs for what they are... In fact, classic RPGs were actually casual friendly with turn-based combat and stuff.

Ravinsild wrote: »

I think a lot of people miss the point of an RPG. Even in Zelda where there are no levels the equipment you get along the way is your "level". You run into enemies you strictly cannot beat without a certain item (bomb, bow, hookshot, water flippers, etc..)

The idea, the fantasy, of an RPG is starting out as a nobody with a stick. Then you find a sword. Then you find a better sword, and you get a little better at fighting. You go from zero to hero. You don't start out as Conan and kill 20 men single-handedly. You start out as the green-horn and grow into Conan the Destroyer.

The point, the fantasy, of a role-playing game is assuming the role of a hero who starts out small and weak and overcomes challenges gaining experience and knowledge and wisdom and growing in strength, stature and power. The novice book-worm who knows a single spell grows into Gandalf or Medivh or Merlin - an ArchMage to be respected and feared.

It's the story of the young farmer who is taken in by a Jedi master and learns to harness a power beyond his understanding and grow into a powerful Jedi.

This is shown in games as levels, gear, skills, feats, etc... You start with little and eventually gain much. The fun is in watching your nobody become somebody. People somehow have lost sight of this.

If you don't want levels, challenge, growth, adventure, combat and magic...go play IMVU or Furcadia. I think you're looking for an online graphical chat-room rather than a role-playing game. Other-wise what is your role? Who are you role playing as?

Zelda 2: Link's Adventure actually did have a form of Level System in the form of earning XP Points and upgrading stats with them. You are right though; not all RPGs have a Level System, but most do. Also LoZ is more of a puzzle-solving action RPG than anything.

The main point - especially about Zelda - is that you saw your character progress and grow. You would open world explore and run across things you couldn't beat...then come back later with more items and equipment and be able to get passed them. Even Pokemon has this in the form of TM and HM moves. You can't progress until you get Strength - you see your progress. You see your Pokemon get stronger, you're able to move around the world more freely, you're defeating stronger and stronger gym badge trainers...

This is basic RPG stuff people. Come on.

Ravinsild wrote: »

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

Selique wrote: »

I don't understand why a Leveling system has to be an important part of being an MMO? Can't you progress without it? Innovation in MMO's is something we need, not sticking to the same old recipe which makes the genre boring.

Skills still have levels and meaning. Gear still has CP requirements. Trials still have CP requirements. Who cares what number you have next to your name? What does it matter?

This change is for the better. I personally welcome it with open arms.

It's the sense of accomplishment and knowing your efforts actually MEAN something. Now they don't because we are all virtually the same always. It's as has been stated: it's like using god mode to go anywhere immediately and not be challenged by the enemies there. Even Skyrim had places that were tougher than others... Also as has been said they may as well remove levels and replace it with our CPs. Levels are nothing more than a gear requirement now. On that note Kresh, Ironthread, Silverweave, Topgrain Hide, Iron Hide, Superb Hide, Calcinium, Galatite, Quicksilver, Birch, Ash, and Mahogany are all virtually useless ever since VR was removed.

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

Without the traditional aspect of almost every RPG in existance both single and multiplayer all you have is... well you might as well go play COD or something. Oh, wait, even THEY have SOME form of acquired gear.

AugustoCP wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

An RPG without gear? Sounds awful. I suppose it could work if you had a skill tree system diverse enough to allow for enough different playstyles without the need for gear.

That does sound wonderful, yes.
I absolutely wouldn't mind diverse and fluid abilities, where leveling them takes about as long as it does to learn how to use the abilities you have before taking on more. This varies from person to person so perhaps it could be 'trial' based (skill check) or ELO based (rating system)
To me this would create a much more ultimate PVP system, and if the top 1% level raids were challenging enough, they could be enjoyable achievements as pure skill tests, and not gear checks.

You could still get awesome rewards like beautiful exclusive mounts, titles no one else can get, polymorphs/costumes, secret hair styles, different recipes and motifs (to make costumes), etc etc etc

AugustoCP wrote: »

RPGs have always been about working hard to upgrade your character

This is the part of the game which is not a "game" to me, it is boring and tedious. It was never about this to me, that's something I felt "obligated" to do in order to be competitive and for no other reason. It was never fun, at all. Ever.
I don't want to "work hard" I work hard all day, I want to have fun and compete with other people to be the best player.

In RPGs, the competition is indeed real, and a very serious thing. But the way you become the best is by doing theorycrafting, calculating how to get the best DPS/HPS, testing out new gear combinations, and FARMING them. What you want is having everything handed to you. You might want to leave the RPG genre as a whole.


This might be tedious for you, but certainy not for us RPG fans: This isn't PART of the game for us, this IS the game.


tl;dr Go back to Candy Crush, you filthy casual.

You can prove your point without being stereotypical. I'm a casual player and I play RPGs for what they are... In fact, classic RPGs were actually casual friendly with turn-based combat and stuff.

Ravinsild wrote: »

I think a lot of people miss the point of an RPG. Even in Zelda where there are no levels the equipment you get along the way is your "level". You run into enemies you strictly cannot beat without a certain item (bomb, bow, hookshot, water flippers, etc..)

The idea, the fantasy, of an RPG is starting out as a nobody with a stick. Then you find a sword. Then you find a better sword, and you get a little better at fighting. You go from zero to hero. You don't start out as Conan and kill 20 men single-handedly. You start out as the green-horn and grow into Conan the Destroyer.

The point, the fantasy, of a role-playing game is assuming the role of a hero who starts out small and weak and overcomes challenges gaining experience and knowledge and wisdom and growing in strength, stature and power. The novice book-worm who knows a single spell grows into Gandalf or Medivh or Merlin - an ArchMage to be respected and feared.

It's the story of the young farmer who is taken in by a Jedi master and learns to harness a power beyond his understanding and grow into a powerful Jedi.

This is shown in games as levels, gear, skills, feats, etc... You start with little and eventually gain much. The fun is in watching your nobody become somebody. People somehow have lost sight of this.

If you don't want levels, challenge, growth, adventure, combat and magic...go play IMVU or Furcadia. I think you're looking for an online graphical chat-room rather than a role-playing game. Other-wise what is your role? Who are you role playing as?

Zelda 2: Link's Adventure actually did have a form of Level System in the form of earning XP Points and upgrading stats with them. You are right though; not all RPGs have a Level System, but most do. Also LoZ is more of a puzzle-solving action RPG than anything.

The main point - especially about Zelda - is that you saw your character progress and grow. You would open world explore and run across things you couldn't beat...then come back later with more items and equipment and be able to get passed them. Even Pokemon has this in the form of TM and HM moves. You can't progress until you get Strength - you see your progress. You see your Pokemon get stronger, you're able to move around the world more freely, you're defeating stronger and stronger gym badge trainers...

This is basic RPG stuff people. Come on.

Yes there are games that have you need something to get somewhere but most of those games also require you be strong enough to take on the enemies in the later areas as well. Pokemon has a level system and Zelda has Heart Containers at most, barring Zelda 2. Talking about 2 different kinds of progression here man.

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

Yes there are games that have you need something to get somewhere but most of those games also require you be strong enough to take on the enemies in the later areas as well. Pokemon has a level system and Zelda has Heart Containers at most, barring Zelda 2. Talking about 2 different kinds of progression here man.

I think a lot of people miss the point of an RPG. Even in Zelda where there are no levels the equipment you get along the way is your "level". You run into enemies you strictly cannot beat without a certain item (bomb, bow, hookshot, water flippers, etc..)

The idea, the fantasy, of an RPG is starting out as a nobody with a stick. Then you find a sword. Then you find a better sword, and you get a little better at fighting. You go from zero to hero. You don't start out as Conan and kill 20 men single-handedly. You start out as the green-horn and grow into Conan the Destroyer.

The point, the fantasy, of a role-playing game is assuming the role of a hero who starts out small and weak and overcomes challenges gaining experience and knowledge and wisdom and growing in strength, stature and power. The novice book-worm who knows a single spell grows into Gandalf or Medivh or Merlin - an ArchMage to be respected and feared.

It's the story of the young farmer who is taken in by a Jedi master and learns to harness a power beyond his understanding and grow into a powerful Jedi.

This is shown in games as levels, gear, skills, feats, etc... You start with little and eventually gain much. The fun is in watching your nobody become somebody. People somehow have lost sight of this.

If you don't want levels, challenge, growth, adventure, combat and magic...go play IMVU or Furcadia. I think you're looking for an online graphical chat-room rather than a role-playing game. Other-wise what is your role? Who are you role playing as?

The "powergap" can be incentive to play as you eventually want to reach those heights yourself. You make it accessible yourself by obtaining the power to defeat it. Some people call it a "carrot on a stick" but the concept is just goals to overcome. Harder, stronger, bigger, badder badguys. Much like DragonBall - Super...he can barely fart out a KameHameHa in the beginning....and by Super Goku is a Super Saiya-jin God Super Saiya-jin that can fight deities and fart entire planets out of existence. He grew, and overcame more and more difficult opponents and challenges and kept upgrading his skills and power...

Player characters gain more power typically through stronger gear they equip - because after you have all the skills mastered, all the achievements completed, all the vanity pets collected...the lure of overcoming the next boss for the stronger gear and enjoying the defeating of those obstacles is what keeps people playing.

All content all accessible all of the time to everyone with no upward trajectory is basically an online graphical chat room. There isn't really any game play. There's nothing to overcome or defeat. Which is why I quit Guild Wars 1 and 2 quickly after level cap. There was nothing to keep me playing. I got all the cosmetics and achievements I wanted and they never made anything more difficult or stronger to do.

Edit: People do this in real life too - chasing the latest iPhone, the latest fashion trends, newer suits, better cars, more status, more wealth, more displays of power. In this game you literally start with rags and chains...you look like a run-away slave. You eventually get beautiful, ornate, gem-stone encrusted plate-male with fanciful embroidered swords or mighty flowing robes...

The main point - especially about Zelda - is that you saw your character progress and grow. You would open world explore and run across things you couldn't beat...then come back later with more items and equipment and be able to get passed them. Even Pokemon has this in the form of TM and HM moves. You can't progress until you get Strength - you see your progress. You see your Pokemon get stronger, you're able to move around the world more freely, you're defeating stronger and stronger gym badge trainers...

This is basic RPG stuff people. Come on.

Nightenhowl wrote: »

So will One Tamriel end the alliance war? Would you gank Tom the Khajiit, when he helped you in your daily pledge?

well said... oh wait, maybe when Tom the khajiit wiped you pledge group over and over again it would be quite a bit satisfying? nope, a stupid idea... >_<

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

Ravinsild wrote: »

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

Ravinsild wrote: »

UltimaJoe777 wrote: »

Selique wrote: »

I don't understand why a Leveling system has to be an important part of being an MMO? Can't you progress without it? Innovation in MMO's is something we need, not sticking to the same old recipe which makes the genre boring.

Skills still have levels and meaning. Gear still has CP requirements. Trials still have CP requirements. Who cares what number you have next to your name? What does it matter?

This change is for the better. I personally welcome it with open arms.

It's the sense of accomplishment and knowing your efforts actually MEAN something. Now they don't because we are all virtually the same always. It's as has been stated: it's like using god mode to go anywhere immediately and not be challenged by the enemies there. Even Skyrim had places that were tougher than others... Also as has been said they may as well remove levels and replace it with our CPs. Levels are nothing more than a gear requirement now. On that note Kresh, Ironthread, Silverweave, Topgrain Hide, Iron Hide, Superb Hide, Calcinium, Galatite, Quicksilver, Birch, Ash, and Mahogany are all virtually useless ever since VR was removed.

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

Without the traditional aspect of almost every RPG in existance both single and multiplayer all you have is... well you might as well go play COD or something. Oh, wait, even THEY have SOME form of acquired gear.

AugustoCP wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

holosoul wrote: »

I wish MMOs would quit stagnating on decade old trends like leveling, quests, and gear.
These are not necessary aspects for high quality gameplay, and in fact only reduce from enjoyment and add to tedium.

An RPG without gear? Sounds awful. I suppose it could work if you had a skill tree system diverse enough to allow for enough different playstyles without the need for gear.

That does sound wonderful, yes.
I absolutely wouldn't mind diverse and fluid abilities, where leveling them takes about as long as it does to learn how to use the abilities you have before taking on more. This varies from person to person so perhaps it could be 'trial' based (skill check) or ELO based (rating system)
To me this would create a much more ultimate PVP system, and if the top 1% level raids were challenging enough, they could be enjoyable achievements as pure skill tests, and not gear checks.

You could still get awesome rewards like beautiful exclusive mounts, titles no one else can get, polymorphs/costumes, secret hair styles, different recipes and motifs (to make costumes), etc etc etc

AugustoCP wrote: »

RPGs have always been about working hard to upgrade your character

This is the part of the game which is not a "game" to me, it is boring and tedious. It was never about this to me, that's something I felt "obligated" to do in order to be competitive and for no other reason. It was never fun, at all. Ever.
I don't want to "work hard" I work hard all day, I want to have fun and compete with other people to be the best player.

In RPGs, the competition is indeed real, and a very serious thing. But the way you become the best is by doing theorycrafting, calculating how to get the best DPS/HPS, testing out new gear combinations, and FARMING them. What you want is having everything handed to you. You might want to leave the RPG genre as a whole.


This might be tedious for you, but certainy not for us RPG fans: This isn't PART of the game for us, this IS the game.


tl;dr Go back to Candy Crush, you filthy casual.

You can prove your point without being stereotypical. I'm a casual player and I play RPGs for what they are... In fact, classic RPGs were actually casual friendly with turn-based combat and stuff.

Ravinsild wrote: »

I think a lot of people miss the point of an RPG. Even in Zelda where there are no levels the equipment you get along the way is your "level". You run into enemies you strictly cannot beat without a certain item (bomb, bow, hookshot, water flippers, etc..)

The idea, the fantasy, of an RPG is starting out as a nobody with a stick. Then you find a sword. Then you find a better sword, and you get a little better at fighting. You go from zero to hero. You don't start out as Conan and kill 20 men single-handedly. You start out as the green-horn and grow into Conan the Destroyer.

The point, the fantasy, of a role-playing game is assuming the role of a hero who starts out small and weak and overcomes challenges gaining experience and knowledge and wisdom and growing in strength, stature and power. The novice book-worm who knows a single spell grows into Gandalf or Medivh or Merlin - an ArchMage to be respected and feared.

It's the story of the young farmer who is taken in by a Jedi master and learns to harness a power beyond his understanding and grow into a powerful Jedi.

This is shown in games as levels, gear, skills, feats, etc... You start with little and eventually gain much. The fun is in watching your nobody become somebody. People somehow have lost sight of this.

If you don't want levels, challenge, growth, adventure, combat and magic...go play IMVU or Furcadia. I think you're looking for an online graphical chat-room rather than a role-playing game. Other-wise what is your role? Who are you role playing as?

Zelda 2: Link's Adventure actually did have a form of Level System in the form of earning XP Points and upgrading stats with them. You are right though; not all RPGs have a Level System, but most do. Also LoZ is more of a puzzle-solving action RPG than anything.

The main point - especially about Zelda - is that you saw your character progress and grow. You would open world explore and run across things you couldn't beat...then come back later with more items and equipment and be able to get passed them. Even Pokemon has this in the form of TM and HM moves. You can't progress until you get Strength - you see your progress. You see your Pokemon get stronger, you're able to move around the world more freely, you're defeating stronger and stronger gym badge trainers...

This is basic RPG stuff people. Come on.

Yes there are games that have you need something to get somewhere but most of those games also require you be strong enough to take on the enemies in the later areas as well. Pokemon has a level system and Zelda has Heart Containers at most, barring Zelda 2. Talking about 2 different kinds of progression here man.

You realize you're making my point for me right? Reread everything I posted.

Either your context is off or we are basically saying the same thing. Leveling is a form of progression that many a gamer likes and feels accomplished at achieving. And of course there are other kinds of progression present in many types of games but that doesn't make a level system as a form of progression any less important a mechanic that we can easily go without. My first RPG was Final Fantasy on the NES so level systems are a big part of how I personally view RPGs. Dragon Quest is also big on leveling. Do I mind the grinding though? Of course not! Do others? Sure, to each their own. Does it seem like everyone wants everything handed directly to them from the get-go these days just so they can go do endgame content and/or PvP immediately? Hellz yeah. Is that sad? Quite...

I miss the old days

Seriously, One Tamriel changes nothing about endgame or PvP.