Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

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

OPINION: Should MMOs Scale To A Player's Level, Or Gate Content For Progression?

124

Comments

  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,814
    City of Heroes style sidekicking/scaling is my preference.  Allows disparate level players to group together.  Which is a big advantage. 

    I quit playing ESO the first time due to their horrible grouping mechanism, which made it difficult for even characters of the same level to group up for missions.  Much less when I got back and their was level disparity to boot.  
    Po_gg

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

  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 7,046
    There's nothing linear about MMORPGs who use gated content. You're more than welcome to explore the worlds of Azeroth or Norrath at level 1. You'll die a lot, but you can certainly try. Plenty of people on alliance made the run from the Night Elf area to Ironforge and died to crocs in the swamp. Some people managed not to die at all, but the risk was always the same for everyone.

    It's more suicidal than gated, but that is what progression is all about. If I can wander an entire world and not find anyone or anything more powerful than me, that just sounds like a very open but boring adventure.

  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Member LegendaryPosts: 8,966
    I don't understand the idea of level scaling if the world scales to the player's level, what's the point? If leveling is incorporated into your MMO, scaling is counter productive. If leveling is part of the journey, then no, level scaling is a ridiculous idea. I don't think it works well in GW2. It makes the idea of levels in that game less meaningful. It's not game breaking, I mean, I think ANET did a decent job with what it's supposed to do. But when most of the game play has nothing to do with your level, yet you have to grind out 80 of them...........
    I think the point is to grind for additional skills/abilities or complete additional DLC content to acquire additional skills.

    Not to mention added grinding of alts which I always do with games I really enjoy. Especially different interesting class stories.

    "We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa      "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are."  SR Covey

  • WarzodWarzod Member UncommonPosts: 462
    "One does not simply walk into Mordor..."

    Sure you do, it's no more dangerous than the Shire.
    UngoodQuizzicalChildoftheShadowsKylerandeniterCryomatrixRhoklaw
  • LacedaemonLacedaemon Newbie CommonPosts: 6
    If you're going to make levels irrelevant, you're just playing a multiplayer game, not an MMORPG.
  • MowzerMowzer Member UncommonPosts: 76
    As many have already said, theres room for both.
  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 8,307
    Warzod said:
    "One does not simply walk into Mordor..."

    Sure you do, it's no more dangerous than the Shire.
    It's an interesting statement. Then hobbits were the ones that walked into Mordor. Between them they had 1 magical sword (no training) and some cooking supplies. They managed to team with people way outside their League and had a meaning contribution to the outcome. That's more like scaled content to me. Thanks for pointing that out :) 
    UngooddeniterIselinRhoklaw
  • ultimateduckultimateduck Member RarePosts: 753
    I prefer a world that exists whether I'm there or not, so nothing in the world changes just because I logged in. If I'm a level 12 character that walks into the wrong area, I will be killed by a higher level mob. I am not a fan of instanced worlds.
  • MaridMarid Member UncommonPosts: 128
    Here we are again with this either/or stuff...it's okay to want and have it both ways in the same game. Guild Wars 2 is a very good example of that.
  • ChildoftheShadowsChildoftheShadows Member EpicPosts: 1,830
    Marid said:
    Here we are again with this either/or stuff...it's okay to want and have it both ways in the same game. Guild Wars 2 is a very good example of that.
    A good example of why it’s a terrible idea. Yes. 
    Marid
    "Wake up, It's RNG, there is no such thing as 'rare'"
    - Ungood
  • MaridMarid Member UncommonPosts: 128
    Marid said:
    Here we are again with this either/or stuff...it's okay to want and have it both ways in the same game. Guild Wars 2 is a very good example of that.
    A good example of why it’s a terrible idea. Yes. 

    What is your alternative to one of the most popular MMOs ever created?
  • RhoklawRhoklaw Member EpicPosts: 7,046
    Nanfoodle said:
    Warzod said:
    "One does not simply walk into Mordor..."

    Sure you do, it's no more dangerous than the Shire.
    It's an interesting statement. Then hobbits were the ones that walked into Mordor. Between them they had 1 magical sword (no training) and some cooking supplies. They managed to team with people way outside their League and had a meaning contribution to the outcome. That's more like scaled content to me. Thanks for pointing that out :) 
    Actually, it is still gated content. They just avoided it by sneaking around everything, which as I stated earlier is available in any gated / linear MMO. People won't do it because it's "too risky". If Frodo and Sam ever got spotted by a Nazgul or an army at the black gates, they'd have died, end of story. So no, definitely not scaled content.

  • ScorchienScorchien Member LegendaryPosts: 7,342
    Marid said:
    Marid said:
    Here we are again with this either/or stuff...it's okay to want and have it both ways in the same game. Guild Wars 2 is a very good example of that.
    A good example of why it’s a terrible idea. Yes. 

    What is your alternative to one of the most popular MMOs ever created?

    Which is hanging by a thread , barley making the bills , and may shutter sooner than later
  • OzmodanOzmodan Member EpicPosts: 9,722
    This is what separates ESO from the rest of the wannabes.  You don't have huge areas that become dead zones after people level through them.  Wow especially.   

    EQ ruined the MMORPG genre by making all their zones certain levels and so many foolish copycats followed.
  • cameltosiscameltosis Member EpicPosts: 2,534
    Nanfoodle said:
    Warzod said:
    "One does not simply walk into Mordor..."

    Sure you do, it's no more dangerous than the Shire.
    It's an interesting statement. Then hobbits were the ones that walked into Mordor. Between them they had 1 magical sword (no training) and some cooking supplies. They managed to team with people way outside their League and had a meaning contribution to the outcome. That's more like scaled content to me. Thanks for pointing that out :) 

    It's horizontal progression :P

    Frodo and the hobbits have chosen to give up size, strength and weapons training in favour of stealth, cooking, and magic resistence

    Well, maybe they didn't choose to give up size....
  • ArglebargleArglebargle Member RarePosts: 2,814
    Nanfoodle said:
    Warzod said:
    "One does not simply walk into Mordor..."

    Sure you do, it's no more dangerous than the Shire.
    It's an interesting statement. Then hobbits were the ones that walked into Mordor. Between them they had 1 magical sword (no training) and some cooking supplies. They managed to team with people way outside their League and had a meaning contribution to the outcome. That's more like scaled content to me. Thanks for pointing that out :) 

    It's horizontal progression :P

    Frodo and the hobbits have chosen to give up size, strength and weapons training in favour of stealth, cooking, and magic resistence

    Well, maybe they didn't choose to give up size....
    Everyone knowss they were trickssy!

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

  • MaridMarid Member UncommonPosts: 128
    Scorchien said:
    Marid said:
    Marid said:
    Here we are again with this either/or stuff...it's okay to want and have it both ways in the same game. Guild Wars 2 is a very good example of that.
    A good example of why it’s a terrible idea. Yes. 

    What is your alternative to one of the most popular MMOs ever created?

    Which is hanging by a thread , barley making the bills , and may shutter sooner than later

    That isn't an alternative...it's just a stupid statement borne out of pure spite.
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 4,138
    Marid said:
    Marid said:
    Here we are again with this either/or stuff...it's okay to want and have it both ways in the same game. Guild Wars 2 is a very good example of that.
    A good example of why it’s a terrible idea. Yes. 

    What is your alternative to one of the most popular MMOs ever created?
    GW2, was not the most popular MMO, it was and apparently still is, very popular. But I think it would have been a better MMO if they didn't try to Up-Scale players, like they did in South Sun Cove, WvW, and Fractals. 

    Personally, I believe their system of Down-scaling was spot on, as you were always stronger being down-scaled, due to skills, runes, infusions, and the better your gear, the stronger you ended up being overall. 

    And this did make it so that content expanded as you leveled, you added Zones you could go to, you were not herded through content, and then stuck in the "End Game" like most other games. You could go anywhere and the content remained viable, like DE's, World Bosses, and other events, your entire gaming experience. 

    So, no matter what anyone says, I thought that was really a great part of GW2's Open World Exploration and social game play, that you never truly just out-leveled a zone. IIRC, when I first started playing, they did not up-level players for Core Zones, and Dungeons, so, there was also that sense of going into a zone that was way to powerful for you, knowing that if any mob caught you, they were going to mess you up (Not sure if that is the case any longer)

    I want to make it clear, I am saying this BEFORE the upcoming DPS Balance Patch, so I have no idea how things will feel after that goes live.
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
  • EQN13EQN13 Member UncommonPosts: 26
    solo mmo's need to scale .
    group based mmo's need zones to be a specific level ranges.
    i like both styles .
  • Po_ggPo_gg Member EpicPosts: 5,181
    Nanfoodle said:
    Warzod said:
    "One does not simply walk into Mordor..."

    Sure you do, it's no more dangerous than the Shire.
    It's an interesting statement. Then hobbits were the ones that walked into Mordor. Between them they had 1 magical sword (no training) and some cooking supplies. They managed to team with people way outside their League and had a meaning contribution to the outcome. That's more like scaled content to me. Thanks for pointing that out :) 

    It's horizontal progression :P

    Frodo and the hobbits have chosen to give up size, strength and weapons training in favour of stealth, cooking, and magic resistence

    Well, maybe they didn't choose to give up size....
    While I believe Warzod's post was sarcastic, it's accurate. Exactly that would happen in a lame, scaled Middle-earth.


    They were stealthy, teaming up with others, then sneaking again, avoiding mobs, searching for a forgotten backdoor while an entire army waged war as a distraction.
    Also, not just "1 magical sword (no training)" Nanfoodle, besides the rope and the light they had one of the most powerful BiS rings  :D

    I love how LotRO was built, you can do the same in the game too.
    If you're good with your sneaking and mob avoidance, or you have a good team (for either as escort or for distraction), you can reach very far.
    Hobbits were taken to Isengard on livestream as a server competition, for Eru's sake :) and several chickens have already seen Mordor in the past years. That means level 1, around level 120 big baddies.


    Basically that's the design I prefer, and what I mentioned in the first post. Players should go everywhere, if they dare to face the consequences.
    No to gating, and no to forced scaling, both are shitty concepts.
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 4,138
    Po_gg said:
    Nanfoodle said:
    Warzod said:
    "One does not simply walk into Mordor..."

    Sure you do, it's no more dangerous than the Shire.
    It's an interesting statement. Then hobbits were the ones that walked into Mordor. Between them they had 1 magical sword (no training) and some cooking supplies. They managed to team with people way outside their League and had a meaning contribution to the outcome. That's more like scaled content to me. Thanks for pointing that out :) 

    It's horizontal progression :P

    Frodo and the hobbits have chosen to give up size, strength and weapons training in favour of stealth, cooking, and magic resistence

    Well, maybe they didn't choose to give up size....
    While I believe Warzod's post was sarcastic, it's accurate. Exactly that would happen in a lame, scaled Middle-earth.


    They were stealthy, teaming up with others, then sneaking again, avoiding mobs, searching for a forgotten backdoor while an entire army waged war as a distraction.
    Also, not just "1 magical sword (no training)" Nanfoodle, besides the rope and the light they had one of the most powerful BiS rings  :D

    I love how LotRO was built, you can do the same in the game too.
    If you're good with your sneaking and mob avoidance, or you have a good team (for either as escort or for distraction), you can reach very far.
    Hobbits were taken to Isengard on livestream as a server competition, for Eru's sake :) and several chickens have already seen Mordor in the past years. That means level 1, around level 120 big baddies.


    Basically that's the design I prefer, and what I mentioned in the first post. Players should go everywhere, if they dare to face the consequences.
    No to gating, and no to forced scaling, both are shitty concepts.
    I agree with this, in the idea of Open World Content. When it comes to things like world maps and open zones.. sure.. go out and wander, get stepped on by a giant.. that was grand fun in EQ. So by all means, I support this.

    I disagree with this in the idea of Instance or dungeon style content, where someone can join a group for content they are well below level for, or woefully unprepared, Because then are imposing upon other people.
    Po_gg
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
  • UngoodUngood Member EpicPosts: 4,138
    Just to say this again:

    My Belief:

    Open World.
    (Any map that would be Explorer/Open Zone)

    • No Gates, go Wherever you want.
    • Mobs still have levels of power, so some will be able to one hit kill you, just walking by. 
    • Scale-Down only , so All Zones Remain Viable and Fun.

    Instance Content.
    (Dungeons/Raids/Etc)

    • Hard Fixed Gates: Level/Gear/Flagging
    • No Scaling.
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
  • Po_ggPo_gg Member EpicPosts: 5,181
    Mine is easier, and also more forgiving/liberal, hence my motto: option is king. As said earlier, either no scaling at all, or give it as a tool for players.


    Open world:
    - no gating, go anywhere you want
    - fixed world, with all its dangers and challenges
        (option, scaling tool in the players' hands, for those occasions of grouping with different level players, helping a lowbie in a mission without stomp it through, etc. 
    Just like CoH/CO has with mentor/sidekick and difficulty settings.
    Plus, then the One Tamriel fanatics too could scale themselves 24/7, and play like a forced scaling game :D )

    Instances:
    -no gating, or maybe some mild gates*
    -fixed mobs and bosses
        (option, scaling tool in the players' hands.
    Just like LotRO has it with most instances and raids - but not with Rift, thankfully)


    *Mild gate is LotRO's minus 5 levels for example.
    In a sort of "open world difficulty adjust" you can do quests higher levels above you, with the ceiling of 5. Mobs 5+ ahead easily shrug off your attacks, so better to sneak around them.
    But, in an instance/raid you can't avoid them, maybe the fodder but surely not the bosses, so there's the mild gate:
    if an instance has a level scale option of 50- for example (so it can be set anywhere between 50 and the cap, but the lowest it can offer is level 50 mobs), you can't enter unless you're at least level 45.
    No other gating BS like classes, gear, flags, etc.
  • jerkbeastjerkbeast Member UncommonPosts: 253
    I think scaling should be optional. If you want it....use it. If you don't (in games that used to have progression especially) leave it off. Or make it so the first player you get to max level has no scaling, but you can use scale after that to play your favorite areas. I hate scaling in ESO because I'll pick up a quest in the zone I want to play in, and it takes me all over the damn world.

    If you ever played EQ, and got too close to a sand giant, or a griffon you know fear....if you get too near most things in ESO you just easily kill it, and move on.
    SavageHorizonScorchien
  • SavageHorizonSavageHorizon Member RarePosts: 3,432
    ESO is a terrible example of not what to do when advancing through content in an mmo. There is literally no risk in the game, no sence of danger, fear or excitement.

    It's  great on story but that's about it imo. Personally, the making of all zones available to all levels is just dumb and lazy. 

    Level scaling is sad imo, it's takes away one of the key components of what  makes an Mmo an Mmo. 

    Scorchien




Sign In or Register to comment.