This is also the reason I always got bored with MMORPGs. At 10th level, I have 100 hit points, my enemies have 80 hit points, and both of us do about 10 points of damage on a successful hit. Divide everything by 10 and you have the exact situation I was in at 1st level.
The guys making SWG seem to be trying to change this, though. For example, hit points won’t change that much with level. Hopefully, leveling your character will give you new skills and abilities that you must employ effectively in order to defeat more difficult creatures, rather than just giving you a larger number of hp and damage so that you can use the same tactics against new foes.
And hopefully, there will be many ways to change and improve your character without fighitng monsters at all. Ultimately, though, I think there does have to be character improvement. A purely “social” game where your character’s abilities are the same throughout the experience is not something I would enjoy and probably not something most people would enjoy (although some definitely would).
Some of them may not be willing to do so, but until we have a game that offers another alternative, I don’t think anyone can say for sure how well that alternative would go over. Currently, hundreds of thousands of people (including myself, at times) ride the levelling treadmill. Game designers use this as proof that the levelling treadmill works. But how many of those people ride it because there aren’t any alternatives? The fact that it works does not preclude the possibility that something else might work a lot better.
Ultimately, though, I think there does have to be character improvement.
As you point out, “character improvement” does not have to mean numerical stat and increases, or level increases (which amounts to the same thing). In fact, I’d say that’s the least interesting form of improvement that you could have. And really, I think people value change more than they value improvement, whether they realize it or not. Or to put it another way, they value character improvement because character improvement adds variety over the course of the game, keeps it from becoming repetitive. The reason the current batch of MMORPGs is so unsatisfying is that they offer only a very superficial sort of change. Solo computer RPGs from 10 years ago have more interesting game dynamics.
Some of them may not be willing to do so, but until we have a game that offers another alternative, I don’t think anyone can say for sure how well that alternative would go over. Currently, hundreds of thousands of people (including myself, at times) ride the levelling treadmill. Game designers use this as proof that the levelling treadmill works. But how many of those people ride it because there aren’t any alternatives? The fact that it works does not preclude the possibility that something else might work a lot better.
[/quote]
This is a good point. The shallow statement that people who play MMOGs like the leveling treadmill or that is all we have is asinine and ludicrous. It is all we are provided for the most part. I know many would agree with a different system if someone would come up with a good one.
[quote]Ultimately, though, I think there does have to be character improvement.
As you point out, “character improvement” does not have to mean numerical stat and increases, or level increases (which amounts to the same thing). In fact, I’d say that’s the least interesting form of improvement that you could have. And really, I think people value change more than they value improvement, whether they realize it or not. Or to put it another way, they value character improvement because character improvement adds variety over the course of the game, keeps it from becoming repetitive. The reason the current batch of MMORPGs is so unsatisfying is that they offer only a very superficial sort of change. Solo computer RPGs from 10 years ago have more interesting game dynamics.[/quote]
I would agree but they need to determine a better system. Maybe SWG will have that but turning SWG or any other MMOG into BF1942 makes no sense. It has to offer a lot more than that.
I don’t necessarily disagree, but given that I’ve been spending way more time playing the single-level BF1942 demo than I have spent on any MMORPG since EverQuest, I have to wonder how many of the “necessary” elements of online RPGs are simply unnecessary things that we’ve come to take for granted.
I don’t necessarily disagree, but given that I’ve been spending way more time playing the single-level BF1942 demo than I have spent on any MMORPG since EverQuest, I have to wonder how many of the “necessary” elements of online RPGs are simply unnecessary things that we’ve come to take for granted.[/quote]
The question is would you pay $10 a month to play BF1942? I probably wouldn’t. There is nothing persistant about it. It is a GREAT game for what it is trying to do and that is be a WW2 battle sim-light. I play it a ton as well. But for a monthly fee I want more. I want to be able to advance my character make him better (in some way) and feel like I have gotten something back for that monthly fee. I am sort of interested in planetside but that has a gigantic scope and I would imagine some type of advancement at least with skills/ranks ability to use certain items command troops etc. Still, I don’t even know if that will be enough to keep me interested long term.
I don’t necessarily disagree, but given that I’ve been spending way more time playing the single-level BF1942 demo than I have spent on any MMORPG since EverQuest, I have to wonder how many of the “necessary” elements of online RPGs are simply unnecessary things that we’ve come to take for granted.[/quote]
Maybe you don’t really like MMORPGs? Lot’s of folks don’t.
I’m a bit burned out on them myself, but I can’t see spending $10 a month for a single-player game (unless the box was close to free).
Is it much less persistent than an MMORPG? There, too, you have an eternally unchanging world, where the same battles are fought over and over again but nothing important ever changes. I guess that qualifies as persistence, but BF1942 has that, too.
Characters develop, and those developments are persistent. But as I said before, I find the character advancement aspect of MMORPGs rather dull.
The only other meaningful difference is that MMORPGs have a huge contiguous world, whereas BF1942 merely has a collection of unlinked maps. That is a pretty big difference, but I don’t think it’s one that inspires me to hand over $10 a month in one case and expect free play in the other. After all, Morrowind also has a huge contiguous world, and I need not pay a monthly fee to play that.
Honestly, if EA set up a large bank of good, low-ping servers (enough to ensure that you can always get into a game) with a variety of different game settings for BF1942, I probably would pay $10 a month to use them.
Maybe you don’t really like MMORPGs? Lot’s of folks don’t.
I don’t much like the current batch, no. I love the concept, though (and role-playing games in general). I just wish developers would do more with it.
Is it much less persistent than an MMORPG? There, too, you have an eternally unchanging world, where the same battles are fought over and over again but nothing important ever changes. I guess that qualifies as persistence, but BF1942 has that, too. [/quote]
But you play with and against different people every time you choose a new server in BF1942 and leveling up does have an effect in an MMOG. It typically allows you to go places and fight things you couldn’t before, nothing like this exsists in BF1942. Then there are the items you can aquire and are there the next time you log on. I agree the current crop of MMOGs doesn’t have the best design but even from just a social aspect they are far different than BF1942.
