Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Scaleable Combat?

HelleriHelleri Member UncommonPosts: 930

I am interested to know what people think about this mechanic in general.

What got me thinking about it is that, in my MMORPG of choice (Runescape) more recently made and revamped quests and activities are frequently featuring scalable combat.

 

For clarification, this is where the player encounters combat situations in which the monsters have no fixed combat level but adjust themselves according to what is necessary to make the encounter challenging for the player.

 

So an example would be the new quest "The Death of Chilvary". A day 1, hour 1, newb can play this quest. When they fight the enemies in it, and as a matter of course the boss. They will encounter enemies and a boss adequate for their level (If they were level 4 for instance -the lowest possible level- the enemies would be level 5-6 with the boss likely being around level 9-10). However if a level 200 attempts the quest (max level). The enemies and boss's in it will provide that player with the same degree of challenge as it did with newb, scaled up.

 

From what I have seen of this. It is a field-of-play-leveler that also seems to serve to slow content inevitably becoming stale. The thing is, I have not seen much of it. I have played a lot of MMORPG's. But, nothing that is relatively new in some time now. My only experience with scalable combat is from my game of choice.

 

So, more then a general impression of what people think of the mechanic I would also like to know:

- What games have you played that have scalable combat?

- How well do they apply this mechanic (is it lacking somehow in how they choose to use it)?

- Can you see this mechanic being used a lot more in future games?

- Are there any major deficits to over use of this?

- Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

 

image

«1

Comments

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Member Posts: 906

    Why have progression then?

    When it scales to the number of people it works ok.

    In the ES game Oblivion, the difficulty  increased with your stats, it was like you never gained power. 

    Not to mention, people want to be rewarded accordingly. So is lower difficulty even viable at this point.

    I would need to see some other version of this than what I have seen personally.

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,774
    Originally posted by FinalFikus

    Why have progression then?

    When it scales to the number of people it works ok.

    In the ES game Oblivion, the difficulty  increased with your stats, it was like you never gained power. 

    Not to mention, people want to be rewarded accordingly. So is lower difficulty even viable at this point.

    I would need to see some other version of this than what I have seen personally.

    I agree. A totally scalable system means there is no progression, and may as well just frame it as a combat game with no progression.

    The best solution is a difficulty slider like that in Diablo 3. It does let the player choose a level of scale (both challenge & reward), and no one can claim the game is neither too easy, or too hard.

     

  • remsleepremsleep Member RarePosts: 498

    I'd love to see a MMORPG venture into new territory, where there would be no Hitpoints as means of life/and damage.

    RPGs like TRoS, Cyberpunk 2020 etc.. have shown this to be very viable alternative to standard HP based games.

     

  • QuirhidQuirhid Member UncommonPosts: 6,230

    I don't like games where difficulty is adjusted simply by increasing or decreasing health and damage. I much prefer systems where difficulty is adjusted through AI behavior or applying an alternative ruleset.

    I think Elder Scrolls games adjust to your level (since Oblivion, quite a bit actually), but the system has never been perfect. Sometimes you are clearly ahead of the monsters, other times you need to expend 2 whole mana pools to kill a single trash mob.

    Guild Wars 2 scales events by adjusting hostile numbers and boss choreography and skill-set. They generally work alright in small to medium scale but tend to be lacking in large scale.

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

  • remsleepremsleep Member RarePosts: 498
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    I don't like games where difficulty is adjusted simply by increasing or decreasing health and damage

    The highlighted part is what I feel is the root of the problem - currently all MMORPGs use HP based system.

     

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 6,158


    Originally posted by Quirhid
    I don't like games where difficulty is adjusted simply by increasing or decreasing health and damage. I much prefer systems where difficulty is adjusted through AI behavior or applying an alternative ruleset.I think Elder Scrolls games adjust to your level (since Oblivion, quite a bit actually), but the system has never been perfect. Sometimes you are clearly ahead of the monsters, other times you need to expend 2 whole mana pools to kill a single trash mob.Guild Wars 2 scales events by adjusting hostile numbers and boss choreography and skill-set. They generally work alright in small to medium scale but tend to be lacking in large scale.
    I could not agree more here. Moar HP and Moar damage does not make an encounter "moar difficult", just moar tedious.

    Wizard101 actually had a point where the opponents would start to cheat. They may cast a spell out of turn in response to a spell you cast. They may get an extra turn.

    On Topic:
    The tough part of scaling content is that in the open world, you are NOT the only player in the world, so others are affected by this scaling. Instances work fine for this, though, as no one else (except possibly group members) is present. Will you create this MMO as one continuous, connected instance?

    In general, I agree with the others. Scalable content negates progress. The "feeling" of improvement is sacrificed. Gone will be the scenario where in the early days, you got your butt kicked by some monster. After that, it becomes your mission to improve in order to come back and beat the snot out of it later on, for payback :)

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,774
    Originally posted by remsleep
    Originally posted by Quirhid

    I don't like games where difficulty is adjusted simply by increasing or decreasing health and damage

    The highlighted part is what I feel is the root of the problem - currently all MMORPGs use HP based system.

     

    Not really.

    Case in point, WOW has 3 raid difficulties: LFR, normal and heoric. Aside from HP/damage scale, higher difficulty will have slightly different mechanics too.

     

  • HelleriHelleri Member UncommonPosts: 930

    Okay so I was going to do the whole quote several people in one reply thing. But looking at the whole of it I think I can get at this without doing that (down to the link is the short of it, the rest is just me rambling on).

     

    It's what I like to call the difference between difficulty and challenge...

     

    Difficulty being: The quality of something that makes it hard to do : the difficult nature of something.

    [this being only one but the most apt definition for what we are discussing]

     

    And, Challenge Being: To arouse or stimulate especially by presenting with difficulties.

    [again using the most apt definition pertaining to our subject]

     

    At face value one might be lead to assume the words are synonymous in regards to each other. However, they are not. A difficulty increase is a change to the scale on which something is dealt with. Whereas a challenge increase is a change to the terms that same something is dealt with under (which may include a change in difficulty but is not exclusive to such).

     

    And with that i am reminded of an episode of extra credits I watched not so long ago. Where they put it really well (though using different terms then we elect for)...it's about a 7 minute watch but well worth it, here is a link for any interested: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlBR1z-ue-I

     

    I also wanted to touch on what some have said in regards to the elder scrolls (and especially Oblivion vs. Skyrim). In Oblivion, while it was sometimes exasperating to feel like I was not getting any stronger.  The fact is as I leveled, I was able to take on things I could have never handled at lower levels. And, at about mid level there is a lot below you that becomes one or two hit kills.

     

    So the level scaling did have a purposeful breaking point. And, at max levels I really did feel more powerful. But, without feeling all powerful. There was plenty of enemies at max level that could stand toe to toe with me, but there were much fewer things above me in terms of power. And, the amount of things that were simply below (some at the lowest levels to the point of not even being worth my time) was huge at max level.

     

    If you just say it as an idea. It seems like such a system completely locks out progression. When in practice it actually makes it so that there is not a point where progression becomes too easy. Where levels start to be nominal and you don't really need to get any higher but only do so for the sake of being capped.

     

    In comparison to skyrim. I think the combat in oblivion was actually fantastic. Because, with skyrim I felt set apart from the start. Even as a newb I was given near god-like powers. Shouts broke it for me. After I beat it on legendary with my true nord hero campaign. I started a play through on a khajiit thief & assassin, in which I elected to ignore the main storyline, and for having done so, not gain shouts...

     

    And, I found it unplayable. I tried dropping down to Master difficulty and it was still no go. It was only at expert that I found it to be even doable. The difference between using and not using shouts is tremendous. I also noticed that the combat scaling in it had a much sharper fall off. At level 5...run from anything my size or bigger, at level 10 stand my ground a bit more. at level 15 kill a mammoth. I felt there was scaled combat... But it felt like it was micromanaged. Every specific monster seemed to have a very distinct point at which it was no longer a threat.

     

    I think scaleable combat may have some merit as a widely used mechanic. If it is done absolutely right. It seems like it can be an amazing addition. But do one thing wrong with it, and you bork over everything. Additionally there was an issue raised here about: How do you reconcile the nature scaleable combat with a multi-player environment. And, that's a tough one. I think runescape has done a good job in their implementation of it so far. Not only did they use it for questing where the point of the quest was to dive deeper into lore (and thus, needed to be accessible to everyone). But, they are now using it with the newest world event in which they want everyone to be able to participate.

     

    I think this might be key to using it well...Apply it where ever it is beneficial to level the playing field combatively. For instance many MMORPG have a form of battlefield or team based PvP. Often these mini-games offer unique gear. When the cap in a game is low just about all players can participate and get rewards for their level. But as time goes on and the cap slowly raises. New rewards for higher levels are added; The old rewards tend to remain. However, they are virtually un-obtainable by low levels that could use it at their level. Because the field of play eventually becomes dominated by the strongest players.

     

    If scaleable combat were applied here (not to make every one exactly even but just bring things a bit closer together to allow for more participants). That might be really good. Lower levels could stay competitive for at least the duration that they need to get rewards that fit their level. And, two players who are closer together won't have the outcome decided by who has one more level and because of it that extra power skill that wins it. It will be decided by strategy. In-so-much a change in scale of difficulty could possibly affect a change in challenge.

     

     

     

    image

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Helleri

     

    - What games have you played that have scalable combat?

    Dungeon Runners, Guild Wars 2

    - How well do they apply this mechanic (is it lacking somehow in how they choose to use it)?

    It was both good and bad for DR, and it works very well (scaling the player to the zone) in GW2

    - Can you see this mechanic being used a lot more in future games?

    Somewhat. In a highly instanced game it would work well. In open world, not so much. 

    - Are there any major deficits to over use of this?

    Depending on how it is used, the user could lose a valuable point of reference for progression.

    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression. 

     

     

    There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
    "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre

  • udonudon Member UncommonPosts: 1,803
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Helleri

     

    - What games have you played that have scalable combat?

    Dungeon Runners, Guild Wars 2

    - How well do they apply this mechanic (is it lacking somehow in how they choose to use it)?

    It was both good and bad for DR, and it works very well (scaling the player to the zone) in GW2

    - Can you see this mechanic being used a lot more in future games?

    Somewhat. In a highly instanced game it would work well. In open world, not so much. 

    - Are there any major deficits to over use of this?

    Depending on how it is used, the user could lose a valuable point of reference for progression.

    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression. 

     

     

    Auto scaling in GW2 was one of the things I hated the most about that game.  In theory it's a great idea but it really takes the wind out of the sails from the feeling of becoming more powerful when you level.

  • HelleriHelleri Member UncommonPosts: 930
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Helleri

    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression. 

     

     

    That is an interesting answer (as I had not thought of it as a possible replacement for existing mechanisms). Could you expand on that a little bit?

    image

  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,813

    City of Heroes did this extensively.   Primarily in its instances where you could set a couple of different factors to increase the risk to the level you prefered.   In the open world events they had a thing called 'monster code' which varied the foes to the level of the individual character.   

     

    The increasing bag-of-hit-points method tends to get tedious.  Simon-sez raid mechanics also fail for me.  Level scaling can work when your character has gained more skills or powers or enhancements, so that even if you are scaled to a lower leveled area, you are substantially more powerful than the usual visitor.

     

    CoH also used sidekicking and mentoring as a basic tool of the game.  They may have been the first for this.

    If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 13,023

    I can't see there are any major issues, it works well either as a buddy system or scaled to zone. It did not work that well in the Elder Scrolls series, but I have never known it to cause an issue in CoH or GW2.

    It allows players of different levels to play with friends, to my mind every MMO should have one of those systems.

     25 Agrees

    You received 25 Agrees. You're posting some good content. Great!

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    Now Doesn't That Make You Feel All Warm And Fuzzy Inside? :P

  • AlBQuirkyAlBQuirky Member EpicPosts: 6,158


    Originally posted by Helleri

    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    Originally posted by Helleri
    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?
    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression.
    That is an interesting answer (as I had not thought of it as a possible replacement for existing mechanisms). Could you expand on that a little bit?
    First off, sorry for the loss of formatting :)

    In City of Heroes, they had a "sidekick/mentor" system. There, you could have a higher level character "sidekick" you to their level for missions or just to run around dispensing street justice. You did NOT gain powers of your new level, but your stats were upped to make you have a chance at survival.

    A higher level character could also be "mentored" (I think, trying to recall) and be dropped to the lower character's level, losing the use of the powers they had gained at upper levels.

    This was a great system in that it let players of differing levels play together and group up, without a great disparity between them.

    Does that help?

    - Al

    Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.
    - FARGIN_WAR


  • aesperusaesperus Member UncommonPosts: 5,135
    Originally posted by udon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Helleri

    - What games have you played that have scalable combat?

    Dungeon Runners, Guild Wars 2

    - How well do they apply this mechanic (is it lacking somehow in how they choose to use it)?

    It was both good and bad for DR, and it works very well (scaling the player to the zone) in GW2

    - Can you see this mechanic being used a lot more in future games?

    Somewhat. In a highly instanced game it would work well. In open world, not so much. 

    - Are there any major deficits to over use of this?

    Depending on how it is used, the user could lose a valuable point of reference for progression.

    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression. 

    Auto scaling in GW2 was one of the things I hated the most about that game.  In theory it's a great idea but it really takes the wind out of the sails from the feeling of becoming more powerful when you level.

    That's only true if u still expect games to artificially make you feel powerful. A feature that was once mostly limited to single player games; it leads to a lot of problems when applied to a massively multiplayer setting. As long as players expect the game to make them feel more powerful, it makes it nearly impossible to have truly engaging, difficult, and balanced encounters, as most of that responsibility is taken from the players and automated by the game itself.

    It's actually one of the things I liked about GW2. If you wanted to feel heroic & powerful, you actually needed to do something heroic & powerful. For example, soloing Fractals or leading groups in WvW, etc. People took notice.

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Member Posts: 906


    Id rather progression be done differently. It's already the root of nearly all issues with mmorpgs.

     

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • FinalFikusFinalFikus Member Posts: 906
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by Helleri

    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    Originally posted by Helleri
    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression.
    That is an interesting answer (as I had not thought of it as a possible replacement for existing mechanisms). Could you expand on that a little bit?
    First off, sorry for the loss of formatting :)

     

    In City of Heroes, they had a "sidekick/mentor" system. There, you could have a higher level character "sidekick" you to their level for missions or just to run around dispensing street justice. You did NOT gain powers of your new level, but your stats were upped to make you have a chance at survival.

    A higher level character could also be "mentored" (I think, trying to recall) and be dropped to the lower character's level, losing the use of the powers they had gained at upper levels.

    This was a great system in that it let players of differing levels play together and group up, without a great disparity between them.

    Does that help?

    I used the mentoring thing in COX pretty much every day. For the lower level player, it's nice to be able to play with your friends, but you are pretty much useless. It made one of the most intense combat systems out there boring as hell. It was better than not being able to play with friends at all, but hard to stay awake.

    "If the Damned gave you a roadmap, then you'd know just where to go"

  • HelleriHelleri Member UncommonPosts: 930
    Originally posted by FinalFikus
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by Helleri

    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    Originally posted by Helleri
    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression.
    That is an interesting answer (as I had not thought of it as a possible replacement for existing mechanisms). Could you expand on that a little bit?
    First off, sorry for the loss of formatting :)

     

    In City of Heroes, they had a "sidekick/mentor" system. There, you could have a higher level character "sidekick" you to their level for missions or just to run around dispensing street justice. You did NOT gain powers of your new level, but your stats were upped to make you have a chance at survival.

    A higher level character could also be "mentored" (I think, trying to recall) and be dropped to the lower character's level, losing the use of the powers they had gained at upper levels.

    This was a great system in that it let players of differing levels play together and group up, without a great disparity between them.

    Does that help?

    I used the mentoring thing in COX pretty much every day. For the lower level player, it's nice to be able to play with your friends, but you are pretty much useless. It made one of the most intense combat systems out there boring as hell. It was better than not being able to play with friends at all, but hard to stay awake.

    So then it might be pretty cool to see a scaling features in party options, huh? Also, I recall maplestory had a mentor system. I think theirs was a lot more loose then it sounds like CoH would have been. It seemed like basically you were just assigning yourself mutually agreed upon responsibility for a newb in MS...actually I didn't understand it that well and barely recall the feature.

    image

  • Flyte27Flyte27 Member RarePosts: 4,574
    I never understood the scalable monsters idea.  Yes it allows you to go anywhere and do anything right away, but it also defeats the purpose of leveling.  You are supposed to feel strong and more able to fight strong monsters.  That means there must still be trivial monsters around that are now easy for you to defeat.  I don't know if the leveling mechanic is flawed or not, but I would say that rather than having scaling of monsters it's better to just have no levels at all.  Keep HP/MP the same throughout the game.  The only things that will increase are skills and attributes.  Most attributes should be tied to a certain skill raising anyway.  Ultima Online had a pretty darn good skill system IMO.
  • dave6660dave6660 Member UncommonPosts: 2,699

    This is one of those ideas that sound good on paper but I don't like when implemented.

    You'd be better of just getting rid of vertical progression and make it horizontal.

    “There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.”
    -- Herman Melville

  • HelleriHelleri Member UncommonPosts: 930

    I just realized that combat scaling is in most MMORPG that I have played. It's just coming in a much more harsh form. Tiered Experience Gain.

    Example:

    You enter a low level area at level 9, the monsters in the area range from about 8-11 in level. Let's say the average experience you get per kill is 110xp and at your level you need 1525xp to get to level 10. You will need to kill 14 monsters in order to level. Each monster takes you about 45 seconds to kill. You should only be killing monsters for about 8-9 minutes (considering that you stop to heal a couple times or take a closer look at a drop).

     

    Later down the line, you are in another area at level 24. It will take you 89,000 experience to level to 25. The monsters your killing give 837xp per kill... but that take about 97 seconds to kill. Since a few levels ago you have had an AoE that you know could 1-2 hit monsters in the level 10 area...If you trained a mob in the level 10 area on yourself of about 15-20 monsters at a time, Used your AoE on them and waiting for their respawn to do it again. You could get a more experience quicker, then grinding the monsters meant for your level. (around 1650 per round, with 5 seconds to do and 30 second respawn would mean almost double the experience per minute).

     

    So, you go back to the level 10 area and try it out. And, you gain 150xp total for killing 15...wtf happened? Well you also notice instead of orange and red labeled like they were before they are now all grey labeled. You are out of the tier bracket for gaining efficient exp on them. only levels 9-12 can effectively use these monsters to level up. After that you are too strong and there is basically no more your character can learn from killing these. Aside, you notice 2-3 newbs are irate with you for taking their monsters. And, you realize...you have no place training here any more. It's for them, not you.

     

    This is fairly common in many MMORPG. It has the same effect as combat scaling. And, if does nerf your ability to do something. It just operates on experience rather then combat.

     

    Now, what if they had approached this differently. Say instead of nerfing the experience you can gain from these monsters, they simply add x1.3 modifier to their hp and a x-0.2 modifier to your damage output. In this case your level remains the same, as does the boars. What changes is your effectiveness at killing them. They are basically 50% more difficult to kill than they would have been without the modifier. Being stronger over all with a wider variety of skills now you still kill them much quicker then you did back at level 9-12. But, it slows you down just enough to where the experience gained isn't any better then grinding at your own level. It just a more relaxed way to get about the same amount of experience in the same amount of time. And, because you kill them slower, newbs are still able to compete.

     

    This also puts you in contact with players you wouldn't likely meet until you were both in the end game. And, maybe you can even help each other. If there are party scaling option for combat. You can use them to lower the difficulty of an instance dungeon you have been having a slightly slower time of it solo'ing then you would like to, and in return they will gain a lot more experience a lot quicker for having entered a dungeon with you that they could have normally never even handled as a team at their level.

    image

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member RarePosts: 4,113
    Originally posted by FinalFikus


    Id rather progression be done differently. It's already the root of nearly all issues with mmorpgs.

     

    Agree.

    Once upon a time....

  • RusqueRusque Member RarePosts: 2,785

    Mob scaling sucks imo.

    It always sounds like it will increase longevity, but in practice it just makes you constantly feel like you haven't progressed. Nothing sadder than being max level, having defeated some major enemy in a raid or w/e and then facing down a  wolf that takes all of your effort to slay. It's just annoying.

    Part of the fun of RPG's is that your character develops, grows stronger and in turn, encounters meaner, tougher foes. Your reward for leveling is that you are presented with bigger fish to fry. Start by killing a rat, end by killing a dragon.  But with scaling mobs, you kill the dragon and then the rat is just as strong as the dragon and the entire world feels lame.

  • waynejr2waynejr2 Member EpicPosts: 7,768
    Originally posted by AlBQuirky

     


    Originally posted by Helleri

    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    Originally posted by Helleri
    - Where a game my elect to employ this mechanic what do you think it's best and highest use is?

    As an alternative to sidekick, mentor and other systems that are put in place to compensate for the flaws in level-based progression.
    That is an interesting answer (as I had not thought of it as a possible replacement for existing mechanisms). Could you expand on that a little bit?
    First off, sorry for the loss of formatting :)

     

    In City of Heroes, they had a "sidekick/mentor" system. There, you could have a higher level character "sidekick" you to their level for missions or just to run around dispensing street justice. You did NOT gain powers of your new level, but your stats were upped to make you have a chance at survival.

    A higher level character could also be "mentored" (I think, trying to recall) and be dropped to the lower character's level, losing the use of the powers they had gained at upper levels.

    This was a great system in that it let players of differing levels play together and group up, without a great disparity between them.

    Does that help?

    City of Heroes was unique in what they were doing at the time. You also had special mobs that were the same color regardless of the level of the player.  IE: purple rikti invasion mob was purple to a level1 and level 50.  The game was designed with all those things in mind.  I liked it.

    I didn't like GW2 sysetm were I dropped in level back at the lower level zones. 

    http://www.youhaventlived.com/qblog/2010/QBlog190810A.html  

    Epic Music:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1

    https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1

    Kyleran:  "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."

    John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."

    FreddyNoNose:  "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."

    LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"




  • waynejr2waynejr2 Member EpicPosts: 7,768
    Originally posted by FinalFikus


    Id rather progression be done differently. It's already the root of nearly all issues with mmorpgs.

     

    What progression system would you like? 

    http://www.youhaventlived.com/qblog/2010/QBlog190810A.html  

    Epic Music:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1

    https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1

    Kyleran:  "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."

    John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."

    FreddyNoNose:  "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."

    LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"




Sign In or Register to comment.