Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Endgame - yes or no

coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon

Currently most popular MMOs / MMORPGs use the concept where players increase the level of their character for a relatively short  period of time, then they hit max level and get involved in so called endgame activities, such as raids, bgs, arenas, instances, sieges, RvR, WvW, etc...

Do you think that future MMOs / MMORPGs should abandon this concept? Do you think they should stick to it?

Most of all do you LIKE this game design?

 

I am curious where other players stand regarding this matter. If you dont care, then just ignore...

 

 

 

 

Waiting for L2 EU Classic

«134

Comments

  • ClaudeSuamOramClaudeSuamOram Hartville, OHPosts: 122Member
    MMORPG's were...again, I say were...suppose to be about the journey, not the destination. So no to it. It can still be there, but not the focus.
  • jazz.bejazz.be Sint-NiklaasPosts: 820Member Uncommon

    Endgame is nothing more than continuity and progress.

    I think everyone wants that, it's a basic element of the genre isn't it?

    Without the so called endgame you would get stuck when you reach the end of whatever progress there is in the game, levels, skill points or exploration etc.

    In the other hand, endgame suggests you can only start it after doing "normal" content.

    So the question should rather be, do you want a whole bunch of activities made available after you do other type of content first.

    Sure why not? Raids or big PVP battles at lvl 1 ;-)

  • CalerxesCalerxes LondonPosts: 1,630Member Uncommon

    Keep up its called Eldergame now endgame has too many negative connotations and is being phased out by all good PR deptartments in your area.

     

     

    This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up™ the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.

  • CodenakCodenak HullPosts: 418Member Common
    In my opinion an RPG should not have an endgame. If no more advancement or story development is possible in any way then you are just spinning your wheels and staying in place.
  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Subscription based games will always have endgame. And its not like you can just "get rid of it": Every game with progress has some sort of endgame - and progress is somewhat of a trademark feature of RPGs.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • aylwynnaylwynn idontsayPosts: 94Member

    I like RvR. But I'd hate it if all MMORPGs would stick RvR as PvP-endcontent. In the past devs tried to score with innovative ideas and concepts ...

    Endgame is a must have to me. Playing the same content from level 1 to max level like in GuildWars 2 is just boring. New ideas and experiences beside new zones and equipment at max level is better.

  • RevoControRevoContro See HolyPosts: 1Member

    If this was asked a couple of years ago, I will firmly answer 'yes'. But since then I've change my mind about how to squeeze my own enjoyment out of MMO gaming which is to enjoy the game for what it is, just the way I play a single player game like Elder Scrolls & The Witcher because to me, enjoyment IS the whole point for me to play the game in the first place. It used to be: I need to go to the end-game as fast as possible because I believe that is where the game is at it's best but when I reach the end-game and start grinding for a better gear so that I could get a better gear so that I could get even a better gear & making it like an unpaid job, just seems pointless.

     

    Now I like to get my enjoyment out of the game from level 1 as long as that is what the game provides. The story, the characters, the questing, the world, the journey instead of the destination. Also doing some PvP/RvR/WvW available along the way like GW2 for example. I will still dip into the end-game content once in a while but this hasn't been my focus for playing the game anymore. If I'm tired of the game, I'll leave & play different games and get back whenever I feel like it weeks or months later. So, the answer is I'm indifferent towards one or the other as long as the game is solid the whole way through. Just my 2 cents.

  • muffins89muffins89 Yakima, WAPosts: 1,306Member Uncommon
    i enjoy the leveling process more than "endgame".  i think develpers are slowly addressing the end game problem in mmo's.  I know Rift has alternate advancement at the lvl cap.  GW2 has the downscaling to make the content not so trivial.  ESO will also have advancement after lvl cap.  im sure there are other games that have similar mechanics.

    I think the prostitute mod corrupted your game files man. -elhefen

  • aesperusaesperus Hamshire, NVPosts: 5,128Member Uncommon

    I see the appeal of endgame, but no. When it comes to online multiplayer games, I think 'endgame' is one of the worst design / gamer mentallities you can have. Multiplayer games are meant to have a certain amount of replayability. This is especially true for MMOs. The whole concept of 'endgame' goes counter to this. It operates under the assumption that you have beaten the game, and now need something to do.

    Properly designed MMOs shouldn't have an ending. They should evolve, change, and leave the journey up to the player.

  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Subscription based games will always have endgame. And its not like you can just "get rid of it": Every game with progress has some sort of endgame - and progress is somewhat of a trademark feature of RPGs.

    There were games which were not built around endgame and were using subscription business model. Simply the max level was hardly obtainable, so that 95% of the population never reached it. L2 would be an example of such game.

    This is just one alternative to WoW model.

    Another one would be dropping levels completely. Most sandboxes have subscription without adapting the concept of quick levelling to cap and joining endgame activities. In these games you usually keep progressing in terms of skills, professions , etc which is a long term process. You do all the activities the game has to offer while not being "capped". You keep improving your character.

    I was wondering if this does not contribute to the longevity issues of recent games. You usually stop any kind of progression besides gear at level cap and just join endgame activities without getting anywhere in the longer run. For WoW, the gear progression at cap works well apparently, but WoW is an exceptional case in many regards.

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aesperus

    I see the appeal of endgame, but no. When it comes to online multiplayer games, I think 'endgame' is one of the worst design / gamer mentallities you can have. Multiplayer games are meant to have a certain amount of replayability. This is especially true for MMOs. The whole concept of 'endgame' goes counter to this. It operates under the assumption that you have beaten the game, and now need something to do.

    Properly designed MMOs shouldn't have an ending. They should evolve, change, and leave the journey up to the player.

    I completely agree.

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,256Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by coretex666

    Currently most popular MMOs / MMORPGs use the concept where players increase the level of their character for a relatively short  period of time, then they hit max level and get involved in so called endgame activities, such as raids, bgs, arenas, instances, sieges, RvR, WvW, etc...

    Do you think that future MMOs / MMORPGs should abandon this concept? Do you think they should stick to it?

    Most of all do you LIKE this game design?

     

    I am curious where other players stand regarding this matter. If you dont care, then just ignore...

     

     

     

     

    Get rid of levels. problem solved...

    image

  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOExposed
    Originally posted by coretex666

    Currently most popular MMOs / MMORPGs use the concept where players increase the level of their character for a relatively short  period of time, then they hit max level and get involved in so called endgame activities, such as raids, bgs, arenas, instances, sieges, RvR, WvW, etc...

    Do you think that future MMOs / MMORPGs should abandon this concept? Do you think they should stick to it?

    Most of all do you LIKE this game design?

     

    I am curious where other players stand regarding this matter. If you dont care, then just ignore...

     

     

     

     

    Get rid of levels. problem solved...

    That is one alternative. Yes

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

  • Alber_gamerAlber_gamer RomePosts: 557Member Uncommon

    "Endgame" is the only reason for mmo's can exist. Without it they'd be as good as single player games that people would just trash after they have "beaten the game".

     

    Furthermore, everyone needs to be in the same page for competition to be fair both in PvE and PvP, and that's only accomplished by everyone being the same level or having access to the same number of skills and perks. In other words - endgame. Without that, what happens is like in all of these silly internet browser games (Ikariam, Travian, etc, you know them) where a few people have been playing 2 years and every new player will always be an underdog dominated by the big bullies. There is no incentive in joining such a game unless you were there from the very beginning so they have to resort to creating new fresh servers every few months to "reset" everyone's chances to accomplish something.

     

    No endgame, no fungame. It's that simple.

    My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.

  • centkincentkin Asbury, NJPosts: 944Member Uncommon
    I kind of liked the way Everquest One handled it.  You have Alternate Advancement where the skills you can get augment how your character plays.  It even works such that if you like play at some level and do not want to advance quite yet, you can hold back and gain AAs instead. 
  • GruntyGrunty TexasPosts: 7,061Member Uncommon
    The only game I've ever gotten to end game in is DC Universe Online. Usually I lose my sense of disbelief and start playing a game like its a spreadsheet. When that happens I get bored long before I get to the end. When a game becomes a quest for increasing the size of a number in various number pools I quit.
  • waynejr2waynejr2 West Toluca Lake, CAPosts: 4,476Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by coretex666

    Currently most popular MMOs / MMORPGs use the concept where players increase the level of their character for a relatively short  period of time, then they hit max level and get involved in so called endgame activities, such as raids, bgs, arenas, instances, sieges, RvR, WvW, etc...

    Do you think that future MMOs / MMORPGs should abandon this concept? Do you think they should stick to it?

    Most of all do you LIKE this game design?

     

    I am curious where other players stand regarding this matter. If you dont care, then just ignore...

     

     

     

     

     Rather than think of it in narrow terms of Raiding, RVR and such, how about this:  Do you want games to keep you entertained for a long time? Do you prefer a short game that you play for a small amount of time then move onto the next game?

  • KaosProphetKaosProphet Edmonton, ABPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by Quirhid
    Subscription based games will always have endgame. And its not like you can just "get rid of it": Every game with progress has some sort of endgame - and progress is somewhat of a trademark feature of RPGs.

    If endgame is defined as "what you do after level cap," I can just "get rid of it" very easily:

    No level cap.  No clear demarcation point at which 'levelling' is done and 'endgame' begins. 

    And why the hell not?  It's not like progression actually *stops* at the so-called endgame anyway.

  • Lovely_LalyLovely_Laly genevaPosts: 734Member

    to me the best model so far is (was) GW1: you got max lvl (20) very fast and started to play whole content (large choice of activities).

    I don't mind raids but it demand too much time (usually) and you need to do it non stop, which is not very handy for all.

    If at the end we gonna have more dungeons and/or Hard Mod, it seems to be better choice as we don't need to make complicate planning.

    try before buy, even if it's a game to avoid bad surprises.
    Worst surprises for me: Aion, GW2

  • LissylLissyl Peru, INPosts: 271Member Common
    Originally posted by Alber_gamer

    "Endgame" is the only reason for mmo's can exist. Without it they'd be as good as single player games that people would just trash after they have "beaten the game".

     

    Furthermore, everyone needs to be in the same page for competition to be fair both in PvE and PvP, and that's only accomplished by everyone being the same level or having access to the same number of skills and perks. In other words - endgame. Without that, what happens is like in all of these silly internet browser games (Ikariam, Travian, etc, you know them) where a few people have been playing 2 years and every new player will always be an underdog dominated by the big bullies. There is no incentive in joining such a game unless you were there from the very beginning so they have to resort to creating new fresh servers every few months to "reset" everyone's chances to accomplish something.

     

    No endgame, no fungame. It's that simple.

    I'm not entirely certain that's true.  It's based on several assumptions that we take at face value without wondering if there's a different/better way.

     

    This is just a thought I've came up with in the last four or five minutes, so if anyone finds a big hole, poke away!  But consider this:  Levels are only something we use for simplicity.  They're something everyone understands, even if few people can actually give a good definition for them.  They're essentially an artifact...and a useful one.  They keep the 'two years vs first day guy' problem at bay.  However, they are also decidedly finite because we stuff everything into them, and only AFTER they're capped do we consider 'alternative' advancement - and linearly at that.

     

    But what if you were to combine the two...and do so in a non-linear fashion that utilized diminishing returns?  Levels are endless...but they also serve no other purpose than to allow you to then train up from a selection of skillsets, each skillset requiring a minimum level.  As the level raises, so too does the training time.  However, the taining return for time begins to diminish past an 'optimum' level.  So, for example.  Using arbitrary, for this example, definitions: Level 85 is the 'optimum' wherein skillsets developed afterwards begin to have diminishing returns.  At level 85, you train 'Combat Skill 85' for an increase of .05% to your combat effectiveness at a cost of 100 hours of training.  At level 86, you train 'Combat Skill 86' for an increase of 0.495% to your combat effectiveness at a cost of 120 hours of training.  87, 0.485 and 150 hours, and so on.  The time is longer, the return is smaller...BUT there is ever-increasing stats, thus removing the true definition of ENDgame.  Eventually, it would be theoretically possible to cap out but that point would be so far in the future as to be untenable and unreachable.  The minute amounts of difference keep competitive balance in pvp (but not perfect balance naturally) while still giving some very small bonus to the individual who has invested more time.

     

    Sorry so long, was just a thought on the matter.

     

    Edit: One clarification: Gaining a level only gives you the opportunity to train.  It doesn't give you any bonus in and of itself at all.  Those must all be trained individually, even though at the lowest levels 'training' might onlly be a couple of minutes each.

  • laokokolaokoko TaipeiPosts: 2,003Member

    maybe there will be many different type of games that will use different method.

    I just think the problem with infinite level or something like that makes the game unfair for the casual and hardcore players.

    I played another game where me and maybe 10 other people hit max level on the server and it creat an unfair advantage since we are more powerful than the rest of the people.

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,743Member Uncommon

    Whatever you call it, players want game.  Endgame is game.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • BenediktBenedikt PraguePosts: 1,406Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Whatever you call it, players want game.  Endgame is game.

    for you maybe, for me endgame is end of game - i quit. i really love the journey - games like ac,ac2 or istaria where you more or less dont get to any endgame - even reaching max level is almost unthinkable. even in vanguard, where level cap is not that far and it has endgame, there is so much things to do that i am playing (and having fun) for years without ever reaching it.

  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Whatever you call it, players want game.  Endgame is game.

    Is it?

    As I mentioned earlier, there have been many successful games with different design than quick levelling + endgame, so that it is not necessary to have "endgame" in MMORPG.

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,743Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by coretex666

    Is it?

    As I mentioned earlier, there have been many successful games with different design than quick levelling + endgame, so that it is not necessary to have "endgame" in MMORPG.

    Are you asking hypothetically whether endgame, filled with player choices, varying challenges, and many activity types, is gameplay?

    Are you implying that if endgame is gameplay, non-endgame isn't gameplay?

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

«134
Sign In or Register to comment.