And some people do. History however has shown that most (all?) rpgs also involve some kind of character progression.
If anyone in a game is role playing and I'm not, the game doesn't suddenly cease to be a role playing game. Same goes the other way. If no one is role playing and I am, the game itself hasn't changed.
edit - and there actually was a super mario rpg.
Yes, we can progress characters by gaining levels, stats, hitpoints, more powers, and new, more powerful equipment in most mmorpgs. But that to me is not any kind of meaningful progression in a world. I've done it enough times to understand how truly meaningless it is. I might as well play a game where I'm just a rodent chasing cheese.
Thrill? and yet PVP in MMO's is often determined by levels and gear, dying from such an outcome is hardly thrilling, though if you were dying while challenging a dungeon, or exploring a new area, yeah, i can see how that can have a certain 'thrill' to it, but that is more likely to be experienced playing MMO's alongside others, not against.
And that is why PvP and vertical progression are horrible mechanics to be mixed.
They are only fun together for the person favored by the stat disparity, and only if that person is a little twerp who derives all of their enjoyment from exercising power over others and none of that enjoyment from actually challenging themselves and becoming insanely good at something.
Nobody losing to stat disparity, and nobody who actually enjoys a real challenge enjoys the way PvP currently works in MMOs.
It's not that it can't be good. It just isn't any good the way it is right now.
Eldurian - "And that is why PvP and vertical progression are horrible mechanics to be mixed."
Until more developers and players figure that out, and make mmorpgs without such mechanics, there will never be a good pvp mmorpg. Games based on Dungeons & Dragons PvE level progression system will never be of any real use to a decent pvp game.
I'd argue the PvE community stands a lot to gain from a few games that do this as well. Things they could gain:
1. Your new friend who just joined the game being able to enjoy content you do together. 2. Would be more fun to revisit places you went and things you did as a lower level character. 3. Developers could develop challenging PvE more easily since all challenges would be based on characters at roughly the same power level.
Personally I think vertical progression saw the height of it's usefulness in D&D and single player RPGs. Heck even in D&D our DM is currently running us as an epic six campaign because he feels 1-20 campaigns have too ridiculous of a power progression.
I like WoW's PvP on PvE servers. Outside of battlegrounds it's consensual. Don't care for forced PvP. Also don't like players that hang around waiting for you to res so they can kill you again and also when they don't give a F' and kill you even though they gain nothing from doing it.
I like WoW's PvP on PvE servers. Outside of battlegrounds it's consensual. Don't care for forced PvP. Also don't like players that hang around waiting for you to res so they can kill you again and also when they don't give a F' and kill you even though they gain nothing from doing it.
I hear ya. But I personally didn't enjoy playing WoW much at all. Tried 2x. Quit once at lvl 60 (late 2010-2011) and again at lvl 50 on another character/class (early 2015). I got bored. The first mmorpg I ever played to max level in was Runes of Magic (free-to-play Wow clone/imitator with cash shop which I only ever spent $10 on). By the time I tried WoW, it was so much easier than Runes of Magic that I didn't feel challenged at all. I also hate quests where you hunt for howsoever many pieces of meat from animals. I did enough of those in Runes of Magic, then WoW, to make myself completely sick to death of them. Asking a paladin to get dinner for you is pretty silly inmho.
I found WoW's PvP to be some of the worst PvP in any MMO ever which I think is the reason I was ultimately never able to max a character there.
In WoW you had to get to the max level of your bracket and twink your gear for that specific level in order for PvP to be very enjoyable.
In SWTOR on the other hand you could take part in PvP fairly enjoyably from level one to max. Infact the only reason I was able to hit max in that game is after I got to the point of "I can't quest anymore. It's just too horridly boring." I was able to push my last few levels through straight PvP.
I found WoW's PvP to be some of the worst PvP in any MMO ever which I think is the reason I was ultimately never able to max a character there.
In WoW you had to get to the max level of your bracket and twink your gear for that specific level in order for PvP to be very enjoyable.
In SWTOR on the other hand you could take part in PvP fairly enjoyably from level one to max. Infact the only reason I was able to hit max in that game is after I got to the point of "I can't quest anymore. It's just too horridly boring." I was able to push my last few levels through straight PvP.
I tried SWTOR, but only played till like level 8 or something, so I have no problem taking your word on that. By that time, after playing some Neverwinter and Tera, I wanted action combat if I was going to do the old combat leveling grind. SWG I never tried. Didn't even know it existed until after it was shut down.
Tera I got tired/bored of due to its repetitive grinding and uninspired story. Forced myself to play to level 20-something, but I also felt that Neverwinter's action combat, number of powers usable at once, and keybind setup for powers was more intuitive, less awkward/clunky/easier to control, and made feel more in control of my character. If it wasn't for enjoyment of Neverwinter's combat system, there's no way I would have continued to play it for long. I actually quit a week or so after I leveled a trickster rogue and a great weapon fighter to 60 (during mod 4 in August-September 2014) and running endgame campaigns a bit on my rogue.
Playing Everquest 2 had totally soured me on endgame grind.
I didn't play Neverwinter again until months later (in early 2015). I stopped and restarted Neverwinter a few times thereafter for various reasons. But I've finally quit that garbage for good after losing hope that it will ever be something interesting to me again. I'm not that desperate to find an mmorpg I at least somewhat or partially enjoy playing anymore.
If the current state of MMORPGs is all I have to hope for, I quit.
I'd possibly like to try Chronicles of Elyria, but I'm not sure yet. If it has vertical level and gear progression, I'll pass.
Unfortunately every MMO out there has some form of vertical progression.
Star Citizen seems to be the closest MMO to pure horizontal progression slated for release. With SC there are no levels so you can fly or help crew any ship from the start of the game. There is also apparently loss when a ship is destroyed but we'll see how meaningful it turns out to be.
Really how the progression turns out all comes down to how well the more expensive ships stack up against the less expensive ships and how much is lost upon ship destruction.
The fact you can help crew more expensive ships from the start is huge though. Owners of multi-man ships will want people on their crews and if you are skilled you'll get invited back. So players with a lot of player skill but no ridiculously expensive ship may still find themselves kicking butt in PvP as crewmembers of larger ships.
Cool. I won't play space exploration/warfare games though. Not my thing. I like watching Star Wars, and have enjoyed a Star Trek movie occasionally, but I very much prefer to play in a world like Middle-Earth, the world of A Song of Ice and Fire (Game of Thrones), Medieval Europe, Feudal Japan (especially the Sengoku Jidai (Age of Warring States) period, or a fantasy world based on Feudal Japan/Japanese myth and legend.
I've always prefered the fantasy theme as well, especially now that I'm with another gamer who prefers it more than I do.
Chris Roberts did an amazing job with Freelancer though. For it's time it was one of the absolutely best games out there. That's where I learned an amazing sci-fi game can draw me into the universe enough that I'm ok with it not being fantasy.
The fact that it is the only game on the market that seems to be trying to make a departure from vertical progression certainly is a major selling point to me. If it can bring me back to my Freelancer days that's going to set a pretty high bar for the fantasy games on the market to beat.
I would way prefer a title of the same quality set in a fantasy universe but the last game I played that was as good as Freelancer was Freelancer.
I've always prefered the fantasy theme as well, especially now that I'm with another gamer who prefers it more than I do.
Chris Roberts did an amazing job with Freelancer though. For it's time it was one of the absolutely best games out there. That's where I learned an amazing sci-fi game can draw me into the universe enough that I'm ok with it not being fantasy.
The fact that it is the only game on the market that seems to be trying to make a departure from vertical progression certainly is a major selling point to me. If it can bring me back to my Freelancer days that's going to set a pretty high bar for the fantasy games on the market to beat.
If not for the acquisition of power and progress, what point is there to play any game?
I've always prefered the fantasy theme as well, especially now that I'm with another gamer who prefers it more than I do.
Chris Roberts did an amazing job with Freelancer though. For it's time it was one of the absolutely best games out there. That's where I learned an amazing sci-fi game can draw me into the universe enough that I'm ok with it not being fantasy.
The fact that it is the only game on the market that seems to be trying to make a departure from vertical progression certainly is a major selling point to me. If it can bring me back to my Freelancer days that's going to set a pretty high bar for the fantasy games on the market to beat.
If not for the acquisition of power and progress, what point is there to play any game?
If the power and progress has no greater objective than the acquisition of power and progress itself, what is the point to play any game?
That's at least the question I find myself asking with most MMOs. Power and progress should not be an end goal. They are a means to an end, and if the end is good enough, they can be cut out entirely without harming the game.
In Freelancer I found that end to be player politics. That is at least why I acquired diplomatic power, and progressed my skills as a player. To fight for causes I believed in. The constant presence of groups with opposing aims and ideals made this an ongoing process that was never truly over.
The primary thing I found to be lacking though was meaningful territorial control and the ability to really dig in, reinforce, and take control of an area. Control had to be exercised through constant defense of your area which could and would change when you and your allies were offline.
That's what I came to MMOs to find, and there are some MMOs that do it much better. Unfortunately none of them have the same low barrier to entry or engaging combat system Freelancer did. So my MMO gaming career for the last 10 years has been finding the best compromise of those areas available.
Why yes, I did read your reply.. I also disagree with some of it.. I AM the hero of my own story, regardless of whether it is contained within a single-player game, an MMO themepark or MMO sandbox.. I have rarely, if ever, been limited by how the developer chooses to convey the game's story.. Nor by the actions of the multitudes around me.. I take on the role that I desire or allow myself to identify (merge, if you will) with the protagonist..
I don't concern myself with what others are experiencing (unless they are in my party or guild).. I leave their game experience to them.. Their choice of content.. playstyle.. interactions.. etc..
My background has quite a bit of tabletop roleplaying in it, so no matter what I play, I will always dictate my actions.. Regardless of the treadmill, themepark attractions, or even forced story elements, I can almost always choose to engage in those or not.. But forced PvP when I can't even defend myself from someone scores of levels higher than me? No thank you..
To be honest, there is no such thing as too many heroes.. But, as for what happens when there are too many heroes and no room for villains, neutrals, store owners, etc.. Well.. That I do agree with.. That isn't the fault of the players, but of the designers.. As I work on my own designs, I came to that conclusion quite a bit ago.. Adventuring worlds favor adventurers, but what about the crafters? The social butterflies? The achievers? The explorers? Build a world.. A living world.. and then everyone writes their own story even as the developer acts as Prime Mover..
..because we're gamers, damn it!! - William Massachusetts (Log Horizon)
I've always prefered the fantasy theme as well, especially now that I'm with another gamer who prefers it more than I do.
Chris Roberts did an amazing job with Freelancer though. For it's time it was one of the absolutely best games out there. That's where I learned an amazing sci-fi game can draw me into the universe enough that I'm ok with it not being fantasy.
The fact that it is the only game on the market that seems to be trying to make a departure from vertical progression certainly is a major selling point to me. If it can bring me back to my Freelancer days that's going to set a pretty high bar for the fantasy games on the market to beat.
If not for the acquisition of power and progress, what point is there to play any game?
If the power and progress has no greater objective than the acquisition of power and progress itself, what is the point to play any game?
That's at least the question I find myself asking with most MMOs. Power and progress should not be an end goal. They are a means to an end, and if the end is good enough, they can be cut out entirely without harming the game.
In Freelancer I found that end to be player politics. That is at least why I acquired diplomatic power, and progressed my skills as a player. To fight for causes I believed in. The constant presence of groups with opposing aims and ideals made this an ongoing process that was never truly over.
The primary thing I found to be lacking though was meaningful territorial control and the ability to really dig in, reinforce, and take control of an area. Control had to be exercised through constant defense of your area which could and would change when you and your allies were offline.
That's what I came to MMOs to find, and there are some MMOs that do it much better. Unfortunately none of them have the same low barrier to entry or engaging combat system Freelancer did. So my MMO gaming career for the last 10 years has been finding the best compromise of those areas available.
But, it was still power and progress, regardless if it was Political Power, Wealth, or the ability to shrug off a Laser Blast to the face, the game needs to offer some kind of progression, something that gives someone who has been playing for a while, a distinct advantage over someone that just started. Often this comes in the form of levels, stats, or what have you.
if after a year of playing, I have no more an advantage inherent in the game then I did the day I started, why did bother to play the game, I may as well posted on Facebook, and went to the movies.
Why yes, I did read your reply.. I also disagree with some of it.. I AM the hero of my own story, regardless of whether it is contained within a single-player game, an MMO themepark or MMO sandbox.. I have rarely, if ever, been limited by how the developer chooses to convey the game's story.. Nor by the actions of the multitudes around me.. I take on the role that I desire or allow myself to identify (merge, if you will) with the protagonist..
I don't concern myself with what others are experiencing (unless they are in my party or guild).. I leave their game experience to them.. Their choice of content.. playstyle.. interactions.. etc..
My background has quite a bit of tabletop roleplaying in it, so no matter what I play, I will always dictate my actions.. Regardless of the treadmill, themepark attractions, or even forced story elements, I can almost always choose to engage in those or not.. But forced PvP when I can't even defend myself from someone scores of levels higher than me? No thank you..
To be honest, there is no such thing as too many heroes.. But, as for what happens when there are too many heroes and no room for villains, neutrals, store owners, etc.. Well.. That I do agree with.. That isn't the fault of the players, but of the designers.. As I work on my own designs, I came to that conclusion quite a bit ago.. Adventuring worlds favor adventurers, but what about the crafters? The social butterflies? The achievers? The explorers? Build a world.. A living world.. and then everyone writes their own story even as the developer acts as Prime Mover..
I think there's such thing as too many heroes in the game world because heroes aren't incredibly common in the real world. But I totally agree that many different paths of development should be available and meaningful to players in terms of progression and achievement in a virtual world. Otherwise, it is not a virtual world, it is just a silly game in every respect.
I don't think PvP should be forced on players in a game any more than it is in the real world. But on earth, that largely depends on such things as where people are born, where they choose to live, where they choose to work and play, where they choose to travel, and whom they choose to interact with, ignore, or stay away from. I want to play an mmorpg where all those real world factors apply in the game world as well.
I honestly don't care. Its not like modern MMOs penalize you for dying -- oh, I have to walk back to my body? Ok. MMOs are supposed to be virtual worlds, and there are "PKers" in the real world, so why would I bitch about it in an MMO when it doesn't even matter?
Why do you inherently need to be more powerful in a game because you've played longer? If that's really true, the people that have been playing for months or years will always dominate the newcomers. If I'm a new player, why do I want to play that game?
I want to play a game to have fun, challenge myself, and to compete with other people. I don't need to be more powerful than anyone else in the game as long as those conditions are met. To me, challenge and competition are a big part of the appeal of games and a major factor in whether they are fun or not. I don't need or want to play a game to feel more powerful or better than other people. Domination is not my primary goal.
I have described a method of progression which I would use in lieu of level and unlimited/infinite gear progression. While the method of progress I want to use is capable of making someone more powerful than others, it won't turn anyone into a god in comparison with other players. Its main goal is to allow players to survive and keep playing without having to start over from scratch, while still having the very real possibility of total failure and defeat.
If you can't ever really, truly lose, what value is there is winning?
I honestly don't care. Its not like modern MMOs penalize you for dying -- oh, I have to walk back to my body? Ok. MMOs are supposed to be virtual worlds, and there are "PKers" in the real world, so why would I bitch about it in an MMO when it doesn't even matter?
Right. Modern MMORPGs suck though. Actually MMORPGs have pretty much always sucked. I want a game with penalties for dying (if, if I manage to get resurrected) and the possibility of permanent death.
Why do you inherently need to be more powerful in a game because you've played longer? If that's really true, the people that have been playing for months or years will always dominate the newcomers. If I'm a new player, why do I want to play that game?
I want to play a game to have fun, challenge myself, and to compete with other people. I don't need to be more powerful than anyone else in the game as long as those conditions are met. To me, challenge and competition are a big part of the appeal of games and a major factor in whether they are fun or not. I don't need or want to play a game to feel more powerful or better than other people. Domination is not my primary goal.
I have described a method of progression which I would use in lieu of level and unlimited/infinite gear progression. While the method of progress I want to use is capable of making someone more powerful than others, it won't turn anyone into a god in comparison with other players. Its main goal is to allow players to survive and keep playing without having to start over from scratch, while still having the very real possibility of total failure and defeat.
If you can't ever really, truly lose, what value is there is winning?
If you work for a company for 10 years, should you be no better off with that company then someone that started yesterday?
You talk of "Real Life" well in real life, when you work at something, and stick with it, you make progress to make you better then the people that just started.
(Edit added) Imagine if someone has been doing Kick Boxing for a year, they are going to be massively better at it, then someone that started that day, a game that does not reflect that same kind of progress, is a game that has no bases in reality. If someone spent the last year, roaming the country, overcoming great beats and engaged in massive battles, they are inherently going to be better at fighting then someone that decided to pick up a sword and fight yesterday.
It's the way life works, when you work at something you get better at it, if you don't, then you should try something else, because you suck.
Simply put, if you do not reward a players a time, they will not invest it.
Why do you inherently need to be more powerful in a game because you've played longer? If that's really true, the people that have been playing for months or years will always dominate the newcomers. If I'm a new player, why do I want to play that game?
I want to play a game to have fun, challenge myself, and to compete with other people. I don't need to be more powerful than anyone else in the game as long as those conditions are met. To me, challenge and competition are a big part of the appeal of games and a major factor in whether they are fun or not. I don't need or want to play a game to feel more powerful or better than other people. Domination is not my primary goal.
I have described a method of progression which I would use in lieu of level and unlimited/infinite gear progression. While the method of progress I want to use is capable of making someone more powerful than others, it won't turn anyone into a god in comparison with other players. Its main goal is to allow players to survive and keep playing without having to start over from scratch, while still having the very real possibility of total failure and defeat.
If you can't ever really, truly lose, what value is there is winning?
If you work for a company for 10 years, should you be no better off with that company then someone that started yesterday?
You talk of "Real Life" well in real life, when you work at something, and stick with it, you make progress to make you better then the people that just started.
(Edit added) Imagine if someone has been doing Kick Boxing for a year, they are going to be massively better at it, then someone that started that day, a game that does not reflect that same kind of progress, is a game that has no bases in reality. If someone spent the last year, roaming the country, overcoming great beats and engaged in massive battles, they are inherently going to be better at fighting then someone that decided to pick up a sword and fight yesterday.
It's the way life works, when you work at something you get better at it, if you don't, then you should try something else, because you suck.
Simply put, if you do not reward a players a time, they will not invest it.
Your analogy is terrible. Do you not work? Lots of people are stuck, because they put in little effort. Lots of people with no seniority come in and pass over those people.
Same thing with the kickboxing. A natural or someone who works hard and is smart can surpass other who have been doing the motions longer.
If you're better that's fine. But don't be better just because you think time invested means better. You're in for a rough life unless you work for a union.
Why do you inherently need to be more powerful in a game because you've played longer? If that's really true, the people that have been playing for months or years will always dominate the newcomers. If I'm a new player, why do I want to play that game?
I want to play a game to have fun, challenge myself, and to compete with other people. I don't need to be more powerful than anyone else in the game as long as those conditions are met. To me, challenge and competition are a big part of the appeal of games and a major factor in whether they are fun or not. I don't need or want to play a game to feel more powerful or better than other people. Domination is not my primary goal.
I have described a method of progression which I would use in lieu of level and unlimited/infinite gear progression. While the method of progress I want to use is capable of making someone more powerful than others, it won't turn anyone into a god in comparison with other players. Its main goal is to allow players to survive and keep playing without having to start over from scratch, while still having the very real possibility of total failure and defeat.
If you can't ever really, truly lose, what value is there is winning?
If you work for a company for 10 years, should you be no better off with that company then someone that started yesterday?
You talk of "Real Life" well in real life, when you work at something, and stick with it, you make progress to make you better then the people that just started.
(Edit added) Imagine if someone has been doing Kick Boxing for a year, they are going to be massively better at it, then someone that started that day, a game that does not reflect that same kind of progress, is a game that has no bases in reality. If someone spent the last year, roaming the country, overcoming great beats and engaged in massive battles, they are inherently going to be better at fighting then someone that decided to pick up a sword and fight yesterday.
It's the way life works, when you work at something you get better at it, if you don't, then you should try something else, because you suck.
Simply put, if you do not reward a players a time, they will not invest it.
Your analogy is terrible. Do you not work? Lots of people are stuck, because they put in little effort. Lots of people with no seniority come in and pass over those people.
Same thing with the kickboxing. A natural or someone who works hard and is smart can surpass other who have been doing the motions longer.
If you're better that's fine. But don't be better just because you think time invested means better. You're in for a rough life unless you work for a union.
Seriously, just sit down.
Your rebuttal is pathetic.
Sure, there are plenty of people that don't progress, stuck in dead end jobs,because simply out they don't want to put in the time or effort. In MMO standards, those are NPC's, or one of the various dead bodies you find littered across the dungeons.
In an MMO, you are playing.. Wait for it... THE HERO, not Average Job Nobody. In case that was never told you.. in MMOs. you are out waging epic battles on the front lines... and Winning!
If you are loosing, then you're not progressing. Last anyone looked you need to win to get the EXP.
In the Real world, people don't get handed all this progress walking in door, they have to earn their marks like everyone else. The better players it more talent will surpass more casual players, absolutely, but they are not gonna do that day one.. but, they still have to work for it.
If you have some kind of illusion that success and advancement is handed to you without effort and work, then you are the one that needs to "Sit down" as you are setting yourself up for a real bad time in real life.
@ZionBane - Don't worry, bro, you can keep playing the kind of games you like to play. I won't get in your way. If the currently available games to play are the best that developers have to offer, I don't think I'll be playing MMORPGs anymore period. I've had enough. I quit.
Comments
Yes, we can progress characters by gaining levels, stats, hitpoints, more powers, and new, more powerful equipment in most mmorpgs. But that to me is not any kind of meaningful progression in a world. I've done it enough times to understand how truly meaningless it is. I might as well play a game where I'm just a rodent chasing cheese.
Eldurian - "And that is why PvP and vertical progression are horrible mechanics to be mixed."
Until more developers and players figure that out, and make mmorpgs without such mechanics, there will never be a good pvp mmorpg. Games based on Dungeons & Dragons PvE level progression system will never be of any real use to a decent pvp game.
1. Your new friend who just joined the game being able to enjoy content you do together.
2. Would be more fun to revisit places you went and things you did as a lower level character.
3. Developers could develop challenging PvE more easily since all challenges would be based on characters at roughly the same power level.
Personally I think vertical progression saw the height of it's usefulness in D&D and single player RPGs. Heck even in D&D our DM is currently running us as an epic six campaign because he feels 1-20 campaigns have too ridiculous of a power progression.
I hear ya. But I personally didn't enjoy playing WoW much at all. Tried 2x. Quit once at lvl 60 (late 2010-2011) and again at lvl 50 on another character/class (early 2015). I got bored. The first mmorpg I ever played to max level in was Runes of Magic (free-to-play Wow clone/imitator with cash shop which I only ever spent $10 on). By the time I tried WoW, it was so much easier than Runes of Magic that I didn't feel challenged at all. I also hate quests where you hunt for howsoever many pieces of meat from animals. I did enough of those in Runes of Magic, then WoW, to make myself completely sick to death of them. Asking a paladin to get dinner for you is pretty silly inmho.
In WoW you had to get to the max level of your bracket and twink your gear for that specific level in order for PvP to be very enjoyable.
In SWTOR on the other hand you could take part in PvP fairly enjoyably from level one to max. Infact the only reason I was able to hit max in that game is after I got to the point of "I can't quest anymore. It's just too horridly boring." I was able to push my last few levels through straight PvP.
I tried SWTOR, but only played till like level 8 or something, so I have no problem taking your word on that. By that time, after playing some Neverwinter and Tera, I wanted action combat if I was going to do the old combat leveling grind. SWG I never tried. Didn't even know it existed until after it was shut down.
Tera I got tired/bored of due to its repetitive grinding and uninspired story. Forced myself to play to level 20-something, but I also felt that Neverwinter's action combat, number of powers usable at once, and keybind setup for powers was more intuitive, less awkward/clunky/easier to control, and made feel more in control of my character. If it wasn't for enjoyment of Neverwinter's combat system, there's no way I would have continued to play it for long. I actually quit a week or so after I leveled a trickster rogue and a great weapon fighter to 60 (during mod 4 in August-September 2014) and running endgame campaigns a bit on my rogue.
Playing Everquest 2 had totally soured me on endgame grind.
I didn't play Neverwinter again until months later (in early 2015). I stopped and restarted Neverwinter a few times thereafter for various reasons. But I've finally quit that garbage for good after losing hope that it will ever be something interesting to me again. I'm not that desperate to find an mmorpg I at least somewhat or partially enjoy playing anymore.
If the current state of MMORPGs is all I have to hope for, I quit.
I'd possibly like to try Chronicles of Elyria, but I'm not sure yet. If it has vertical level and gear progression, I'll pass.
Star Citizen seems to be the closest MMO to pure horizontal progression slated for release. With SC there are no levels so you can fly or help crew any ship from the start of the game. There is also apparently loss when a ship is destroyed but we'll see how meaningful it turns out to be.
Really how the progression turns out all comes down to how well the more expensive ships stack up against the less expensive ships and how much is lost upon ship destruction.
The fact you can help crew more expensive ships from the start is huge though. Owners of multi-man ships will want people on their crews and if you are skilled you'll get invited back. So players with a lot of player skill but no ridiculously expensive ship may still find themselves kicking butt in PvP as crewmembers of larger ships.
Chris Roberts did an amazing job with Freelancer though. For it's time it was one of the absolutely best games out there. That's where I learned an amazing sci-fi game can draw me into the universe enough that I'm ok with it not being fantasy.
The fact that it is the only game on the market that seems to be trying to make a departure from vertical progression certainly is a major selling point to me. If it can bring me back to my Freelancer days that's going to set a pretty high bar for the fantasy games on the market to beat.
I would way prefer a title of the same quality set in a fantasy universe but the last game I played that was as good as Freelancer was Freelancer.
If not for the acquisition of power and progress, what point is there to play any game?
If the power and progress has no greater objective than the acquisition of power and progress itself, what is the point to play any game?
That's at least the question I find myself asking with most MMOs. Power and progress should not be an end goal. They are a means to an end, and if the end is good enough, they can be cut out entirely without harming the game.
In Freelancer I found that end to be player politics. That is at least why I acquired diplomatic power, and progressed my skills as a player. To fight for causes I believed in. The constant presence of groups with opposing aims and ideals made this an ongoing process that was never truly over.
The primary thing I found to be lacking though was meaningful territorial control and the ability to really dig in, reinforce, and take control of an area. Control had to be exercised through constant defense of your area which could and would change when you and your allies were offline.
That's what I came to MMOs to find, and there are some MMOs that do it much better. Unfortunately none of them have the same low barrier to entry or engaging combat system Freelancer did. So my MMO gaming career for the last 10 years has been finding the best compromise of those areas available.
Why yes, I did read your reply.. I also disagree with some of it.. I AM the hero of my own story, regardless of whether it is contained within a single-player game, an MMO themepark or MMO sandbox.. I have rarely, if ever, been limited by how the developer chooses to convey the game's story.. Nor by the actions of the multitudes around me.. I take on the role that I desire or allow myself to identify (merge, if you will) with the protagonist..
I don't concern myself with what others are experiencing (unless they are in my party or guild).. I leave their game experience to them.. Their choice of content.. playstyle.. interactions.. etc..
My background has quite a bit of tabletop roleplaying in it, so no matter what I play, I will always dictate my actions.. Regardless of the treadmill, themepark attractions, or even forced story elements, I can almost always choose to engage in those or not.. But forced PvP when I can't even defend myself from someone scores of levels higher than me? No thank you..
To be honest, there is no such thing as too many heroes.. But, as for what happens when there are too many heroes and no room for villains, neutrals, store owners, etc.. Well.. That I do agree with.. That isn't the fault of the players, but of the designers.. As I work on my own designs, I came to that conclusion quite a bit ago.. Adventuring worlds favor adventurers, but what about the crafters? The social butterflies? The achievers? The explorers? Build a world.. A living world.. and then everyone writes their own story even as the developer acts as Prime Mover..
..because we're gamers, damn it!! - William Massachusetts (Log Horizon)
But, it was still power and progress, regardless if it was Political Power, Wealth, or the ability to shrug off a Laser Blast to the face, the game needs to offer some kind of progression, something that gives someone who has been playing for a while, a distinct advantage over someone that just started. Often this comes in the form of levels, stats, or what have you.
if after a year of playing, I have no more an advantage inherent in the game then I did the day I started, why did bother to play the game, I may as well posted on Facebook, and went to the movies.
I don't think PvP should be forced on players in a game any more than it is in the real world. But on earth, that largely depends on such things as where people are born, where they choose to live, where they choose to work and play, where they choose to travel, and whom they choose to interact with, ignore, or stay away from. I want to play an mmorpg where all those real world factors apply in the game world as well.
Why do you inherently need to be more powerful in a game because you've played longer? If that's really true, the people that have been playing for months or years will always dominate the newcomers. If I'm a new player, why do I want to play that game?
I want to play a game to have fun, challenge myself, and to compete with other people. I don't need to be more powerful than anyone else in the game as long as those conditions are met. To me, challenge and competition are a big part of the appeal of games and a major factor in whether they are fun or not. I don't need or want to play a game to feel more powerful or better than other people. Domination is not my primary goal.
I have described a method of progression which I would use in lieu of level and unlimited/infinite gear progression. While the method of progress I want to use is capable of making someone more powerful than others, it won't turn anyone into a god in comparison with other players. Its main goal is to allow players to survive and keep playing without having to start over from scratch, while still having the very real possibility of total failure and defeat.
If you can't ever really, truly lose, what value is there is winning?
Right. Modern MMORPGs suck though. Actually MMORPGs have pretty much always sucked. I want a game with penalties for dying (if, if I manage to get resurrected) and the possibility of permanent death.
If you work for a company for 10 years, should you be no better off with that company then someone that started yesterday?
You talk of "Real Life" well in real life, when you work at something, and stick with it, you make progress to make you better then the people that just started.
(Edit added) Imagine if someone has been doing Kick Boxing for a year, they are going to be massively better at it, then someone that started that day, a game that does not reflect that same kind of progress, is a game that has no bases in reality. If someone spent the last year, roaming the country, overcoming great beats and engaged in massive battles, they are inherently going to be better at fighting then someone that decided to pick up a sword and fight yesterday.
It's the way life works, when you work at something you get better at it, if you don't, then you should try something else, because you suck.
Simply put, if you do not reward a players a time, they will not invest it.
Your analogy is terrible. Do you not work? Lots of people are stuck, because they put in little effort. Lots of people with no seniority come in and pass over those people.
Same thing with the kickboxing. A natural or someone who works hard and is smart can surpass other who have been doing the motions longer.
If you're better that's fine. But don't be better just because you think time invested means better. You're in for a rough life unless you work for a union.
Seriously, just sit down.
Your rebuttal is pathetic.
Sure, there are plenty of people that don't progress, stuck in dead end jobs,because simply out they don't want to put in the time or effort. In MMO standards, those are NPC's, or one of the various dead bodies you find littered across the dungeons.
In an MMO, you are playing.. Wait for it... THE HERO, not Average Job Nobody. In case that was never told you.. in MMOs. you are out waging epic battles on the front lines... and Winning!
If you are loosing, then you're not progressing. Last anyone looked you need to win to get the EXP.
In the Real world, people don't get handed all this progress walking in door, they have to earn their marks like everyone else. The better players it more talent will surpass more casual players, absolutely, but they are not gonna do that day one.. but, they still have to work for it.
If you have some kind of illusion that success and advancement is handed to you without effort and work, then you are the one that needs to "Sit down" as you are setting yourself up for a real bad time in real life.
You must be epic at Farmville.