Trending Games | WildStar | Neverwinter | Star Wars: The Old Republic | Elder Scrolls Online

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,640,259 Users Online:0
Games:681  Posts:6,074,837

Show Blog

No Progression MMORPG

Posted by vajuras Thursday March 27 2008 at 12:26AM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

Sorry for the spam these few days but Tatum inspired me to blog on this. I know I praise skill-based RPGs alot and might seem to condemn levels. But in reality, I'm more eager to see a "no" progression scheme.

In a "no" progression scheme you don't have to grind creatures for XP. You kill them for money perhaps or because they are in the way (like a critter).

I'm going to breakdown how I envision a "no" progression scheme MMO:

- Sandbox gameplay. This is the only model that can hope to support this. This means totally tossing away the model setup by WoW. Gasp yeah I said it there's nothing much we can take from it.

- Some linear gameplay. I hate quests the way they are now but I still feel they have immense, untapped potential. I'd have them however they will be much fewer in number but still contain an epic feel and nice aura of completion about them.

- Items are just "tools". Yeah I know this is a foreign concept for mainstream but not everyone lives and dies for virtual loot. All items should be viable here. Newbies can craft nice items.

- WYSIWYG Loot. What you see is what you get. You see an NPC guard wearing some fancy guns you'd like to have? Just kill him and take it. None of this BS where I cant loot what I see. Will take a lot of work to make this scheme work however. there can be a chance for random pieces too though like jewelry or slightly more durable armor (higher quality then normal)

- Classes. Screw Classes. Freeform, be anything you want but players will know what you can do perhaps visually. A really strong guy will be huge or want to wear really good protection. Mage types will have staffs. Classes is here in a way but way less restrictive.

- No raids. Well ever wondered why my blogs omit all mention of raiding? Cause I hate raiding. F--- dungeons. Yeah I said it, to hell with that. Instead, you work together with the community to build cities. PVE will all happen naturally and be fairly unique to the region you live in.

- Rich PVP everywhere. Yep, this is a niche MMO all the way. Focused entirely on PvEvP. dont want to get ganked? Better hire more guards to protect your lands. But I do adore you PVE types in EVE Online that loves to reduce your risks so I would toss you guys a few NPC run cities with guards. And you could enjoy great PVE there. But I might toss some carrots out there to lure you to player run city. But heck this a sandbox so you could just stay in 'governed' lands and hf.

- Faction vs Faction PVP + Friendly Fire. Successful FPS games like Call of Duty, Rainbow 6, Halo, etc all have friendly fire. It's also FFA all the way. You can make your own factions and go to war

- 100% Player created items but it will be done the old ways- like Classic UO pre-AoS. All items viable. Uber loot will be siege equipment

- Item decay, looting. Yep not up for debate (so please no whining about it). However, since I dont care for items too much anyway it might only be backpack looting because armor/weapons wont mean anything at all. Player skill ftw- not gear. The uber equipment is the siege equipment that takes an army to use.

- Positive and Negative Sum PVP. Players fight for land. Once land is owned cities can be built. Crafting will be handled totally different from this grind and grind to improve experience we have now. Boring things will be handled by NPC workers. You focus on the exciting parts. Even though looting is here it will also be possible to acquire all items via PVP within one fell swoop. PVP will be profitable. There will be objectives and riches you can earn via all PVP. PVP is my thing and thats all I'd focus on designing with sandbox PVE sprinkled in. I say let WoW be WoW. This would be different and nichey.

- Victory Conditions everywhere. No need for lame instancing we can have victory conditions all over the map. Entire NPC cities can change hands. Player run cities we can handle this many different ways and get a great player dependency relationship happening.

- Progression. Yeah screw that. You spawn with all skills you need based on a fully specced template. Want to be unique? Yeah then maybe there will a minor, fast ramp up to respec via a skill-based + XP system. Yep, I dont care if all you did was run errands and you respecced into a strong warrior. Not everyone wants to roleplay. But if you want to to roleplay, you can stick to 100% skill-based ftw. Freeform. Earn XP or quickly reskill via skill-based. Or hell, maybe I'd just say screw it let people respec at will. IT's a sandbox game after all, pure sandbox. Not a grinder....

Would you play this MMO? If you hate Sandbox games then I dont care anyway this game isn't for you but I'd be interested in sharing ideas with other sandbox gamers.....

mulcher writes:

Made some good points in there, i'm all for the no more leveling, the items having no value could work but its got to have something to keep the players striving for a higher level, citys and rulers of the citys could proboly do.

Comparing Faction vs Faction to FPS games doesnt work at all sorry, just have a FFA Game style where guilds matter, makes it alot easier.

Also you'd have to have some kind of classes imo unless you just gradely choose your path is what i think your getting at so that works.

 

Like the concepts but from a Game Producer stand point no one would make this game cause there alot of points that would turn so many crowds away it wouldnt be profitable at all and the complexity of systems like "what you see is what you get" would just be a pain in the ass to develop succesfully.  0 Raids / PVE would kill more then 50% of the people interested.

 

Just my 3 cents

Thu Mar 27 2008 2:42AM Report
aseryen writes:

i like alot of the ides...like having low lvl noobs make good items...i have been thinking of a game like this...have seperate parts of the world player ran and have it as a huge clan or tribe...all in all i like your ideas but ive never been much of a pvp guy so i havent incorperated that into my thoughts

Thu Mar 27 2008 4:16AM Report
Reborn17 writes:

Sounds like a basic FPS game with mmorpg elements like Project Offset

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/6400.html

Takes away some of the "hamster pressing the right button for a reward" draw of levels but makes it a game suitable for hadcore and casual alike.

Thu Mar 27 2008 5:01AM Report
zergwatch writes:

Raph Koster is the only man in the industry who embraces the sandbox mmorpg.   Unfortunately, he's out wasting his time building webchat for myspace.

To say "hamster pressing the right button for a reward" is the draw of MMORPG's means you never played a true mmorpg where the rewards were building cities, defending your city, seiges, player events, GM events, etc.  Those sorts of things are way more fun than run dungeon 3,328 times.

The truth is, "Run Dungeon 3,328 times" MMORPG's are cheaper and easier to make than a sandbox MMORPG that lets the users create their own fun.

Thu Mar 27 2008 8:37AM Report
calebgold writes:

The game your point call to is ShadowBane. All but the class system becouse ShadowBane did have classes and levels.

And we all know what happen to that game.

Your ideas are good but a game needs a lot of people playing it so it makes money and the corp that built it gets rich or it will not last.

 

Thu Mar 27 2008 9:28AM Report
vajuras writes:

Ah I sense doubt here. You guys should doubt it because nothing like this has ever been tried. Good responses I am glad the comments are focused and on topic.

"Like the concepts but from a Game Producer stand point no one would make this game cause there alot of points that would turn so many crowds away it wouldnt be profitable at all and the complexity of systems like "what you see is what you get" would just be a pain in the ass to develop succesfully.  0 Raids / PVE would kill more then 50% of the people interested."

You misread, there is PVE but no raiding. And yes- this title isnt for everyone. It's optimized- not designed for mass appeal but rather its a tightly oiled machine optimized to deliver an exciting open world experience.

EVE Online is a very nice sandbox but very grindy. This game concept is trying to avoid all that and just provide good gameplay- elements that made Counterstrike infamous. It's missing from mmorpg space beyond Second Life- which really doesnt feel game-y.

checkout "All Points Bullentin" its a no progression scheme MMO. You only unlock better clothes from what I read

Thu Mar 27 2008 9:37AM Report
vajuras writes:

Btw WYISWYG Loot was common to popular games like Diablo, Elder Scroll series, Titan Quest, and other titles.

This game concept isnt a grinder. It's sandboxy dominantly with a touch of some linear elements here and there.

Thu Mar 27 2008 9:40AM Report
Tatum writes:

I like the ideas.  Wish I had time to post up a long, rambling comment right now, but I'll have to do that later on =D

Thu Mar 27 2008 11:01AM Report
vajuras writes:

"The game your point call to is ShadowBane. All but the class system becouse ShadowBane did have classes and levels.

And we all know what happen to that game."

Havent played Shadowbane but from what I've read and seen in PVP videos my ideas would be drastically different.

1) Cities from what I've *read* in SB could be sleeper-ganked. I would handle this much, much differently. Players should have the option to build their cities close to localized law and pay some taxes for security.

2) PVE that I would pursue would be dynamic. I'd use Agent technologies to drive the AI and make NPCs feel real. They can have their own lives, houses, etc. You can risk local law and get in trouble with the city authorities.

3) PvP is not one dimensional per se. PVP can also be political manipulation, strategic, managing resources, coordinating security forces (npc & player). My concept is a blend of PVEvP.

 

Thu Mar 27 2008 12:30PM Report
vajuras writes:

"Comparing Faction vs Faction to FPS games doesnt work at all sorry, just have a FFA Game style where guilds matter, makes it alot easier."

But its not just FFA PVP. Even in FPS Deathmatch servers are way less populated then Team vs Team PVP servers.

This is the secret of their success- in Team PVP, even someone not so skilled at PVP can taste victory.

My ideas are more in line with "friendly fire". You can slay someone from your nation but you'd risk the wratch of local law

Thu Mar 27 2008 12:35PM Report
Gishgeron writes:

I have one...small...issue with the ideal of freeform worlds.

 

I love all of the "mimic real life" elements to sandbox, but so many of you forget that in order for a player-content game to work...there MUST be consequences for actions just like real life. 

I'll skip to the end of my rant.  Most FFAPVP Sanbox games fail because they only empower the veteran players.  If there is NO system to both protect noobs, and inform them...there will never BE a successful one ever made.  I do not wish to remove the FFAPVP in order to protect them, so I have my OWN ideals.  They are thusly...

 

Key gaming elements tied to NPC's.  You couple this with:  NPC's globally recognize murder-types whom simply grief players and deny them access to key game elements PERMANENTLY.  As is, you go on a newb killing spree just to do it...the game NEVER forgets.

I'm all for these great player driven virtual worlds.  Now lets have some ACTUAL consequence to them.  Many of you back the "Full Looting" because its more real...lets also support permanent denial of society elements to ruthless criminals like real life does as well. 

"But Gish!  How  can ANY PVP happen when its like this??"

Easy.  Same way it does in real life.  War time deaths do not count as murder.  Self defense killings don't either.  If you have a self made player faction that wars with another player faction...its not criminal.  You walk up to joe farmer and kill him just to steal his hay...it IS criminal, and society recognizes it and punishes you.  The true PvP is left untouched...the battles for land and resources are still safe.  You would have to have a faction (guild, whatever) to be involved in land and resource disputes anyway.

The only thing removed is the ONE thing that ruins these games.  Griefers.  Best thing is...its NOT removed at all.  But for once...the game world actually responds to it rather than just reward it. 

Anyone who thinks my ideal is terrible....likely just really enjoys griefing people.  The hardcore PvP crowd still has ALL of the joy they could ever want...they don't have time for random player killing for no reason.  They have goals, guilds of people who strive for something.  The murderers bring down the whole game for everyone, and this method fixes it BUT GOOD.

Thu Mar 27 2008 1:26PM Report
vajuras writes:

Gish I cant comment indepth right now (like Tatum RL is a bummer sometimes)

Yeah I'm all for consequences. So killing someone in your own faction there is grieve consequence if caught by local law and you will be outcast after too many mistakes.

That is why its sort of Faction vs Faction.

There will also be lawless areas where anything goes. No laws beyond what players setup

Players can join a Faction and help expand their boundaries. This is how it should be. Like real life, its risk/reward for killing ever a simple farmer if you within governed lands

I'll comment on what Gish wrote in much more detail later tonight.

Thu Mar 27 2008 1:36PM Report
vajuras writes:

Btw, the FFA PVP aspect is the freedom to create your own factions. There will be NPC factions you can join that will be awesome. But you have freedom to start your own and make your own rules

 

Sandbox.

Thu Mar 27 2008 1:38PM Report
morthor writes:

One word for you: Darkfall

;)

Thu Mar 27 2008 1:44PM Report
vajuras writes:

I'll follow Darkfall more cloesly when they show more ingame footage and attend E3. Until then that game just doesnt exist for me.

I'm a fan of DFO but yeah, I'm not thinking bout that game at all until they show me something concrete

Thu Mar 27 2008 2:50PM Report
Gishgeron writes:

I agree about Factional combat, and I agree about Darkfall.

 

I love the ideal.  But after 7 years, thats all it is...an ideal.  They have taken zero steps to show their fans its anything more than a couple terrains and some basic model work.  I'll swear by em when they have a GAME.  I dont care if its even close to finished, they should have a GAME by now.

Thu Mar 27 2008 3:12PM Report
Tatum writes:

Ok, for me two things come up:  1) character customization  2) PvP design.

Even with a no progression system, I'd still like to see an extensive character creation process.  With most newer MMO's, theres little to no character creation.  You pick your race and class, allocate stat points (which have almost no effect on game play), and thats it.  Theres no customization, just a bunch of clones.

With a no progression system I think you'd need a pretty extensive character creation process, since theres no progression.  You pick a race, then allocate stat points (which have a significant effect on game play), then you spend skill points and/or select skills.  Of course, you could add even more to this if you wanted to take it further, like traits, special abilities...but, once you've made your character, their stats never change.  However, there could be worlds of difference between two characters, depending on how they were specced.

Could you gimp yourself with this system?  Probably.  Though, it wouldn't be such a big deal since theres no progression.  It wouldn't take you, say, 50 levels to figure out that your build is screwed.  You could work some respecs in, but I'm not to sure about FULL respecs.   

The PvP design is tough.  I think there are a few different styles that could work really well, depending on how wild you want things to be.

Faction vs Faction - anyone who isn't "declared" is safe.

Faction vs Faction (with frontiers) - same as above, but with lawless, free for all zones.

Free For All (with laws) -  kill anyone, any where, but with severe consequences for killing outside of faction or guild wars.  Punishment would be handed out by the game and NPC's.

Free For All - No consequences from the game or NPC's.  Would be up to the players to regulate their world.

 

 

Thu Mar 27 2008 5:24PM Report
vajuras writes:

[Tatum] Great points Tatum Character Creation should be very detailed I agree. That's one of the things that attracted me to City of Heroes. It's not a sandbox in the least, but they really nailed the Character Custimization

You point out some tough decisions in regards to Faction vs Faction as well. Good post

One weakness of using a Stat system is that its a little tough for new players to figure out what they would like. I supposed it can be overwhelming for new players to see a lot of options. But on other hand, the explorer types like us would be in heaven.

So for people like my one friend that just wants to pick something and play, those type need the 'premade' templates. Explorers like ourselves, will just setup something we enjoy and go with it.

Only thing I'm weighing this scheme against is a 'gated' fast progression scheme. This doesnt exist in mmorpg space either. But a 'gated' rapid progression scheme would give every player a few basic skills from each discipline. From this point, the game observes what the players enjoys and lets them dynamically create a build.

I suppose there is no reason why not to offer both schemes though. A merger would be quite interesting.....

Thu Mar 27 2008 10:09PM Report
vajuras writes:

[Gishgeron] Made a lot of good points. Thanks this is what I wanted, get some input happening...

"I'll skip to the end of my rant.  Most FFAPVP Sanbox games fail because they only empower the veteran players."

True. The Stronger get stronger, the weaker get weaker. This is why PVE is a good thing to have. We can program PVE to make players feel like heroes. Everyone is a winner, win-win

"I'm all for these great player driven virtual worlds.  Now lets have some ACTUAL consequence to them.  Many of you back the "Full Looting" because its more real...lets also support permanent denial of society elements to ruthless criminals like real life does as well. "

My goal is similar but slightly different. With the use of "Factions" we can make a player enemy of that Faction but a "Friend" of the other faction.

I'm not a fan of Good vs Evil per se. In a Good vs Evil scenario your skilled vets will end up picking bad and steamroll the good guys most likely. So instead, I would merely focus on faction vs Faction.

Not so different from your idea. More structured then FFA PVP.

"Anyone who thinks my ideal is terrible....likely just really enjoys griefing people. "

I dont think PVPers should ever be discounted as griefing. Scott Jennings, designer on DaoC / NCsoft, says it best in his blog "PVP Done Right"

Basically he alluded that PVP should indeed screw someone over. Just not too much.

I dont agree with every single point in the article but its a good read:

http://brokentoys.org/2007/12/10/how-to-make-a-game-with-pvp-done-right/

Thu Mar 27 2008 10:20PM Report
Gishgeron writes:

My vote goes to Faction vs Faction with Frontiers.

To add to this...

The resources located in frontiers are to be of highest (and both decaying AND limited) quality.  This division should not be miles ahead of non-frontier stuff, lest you want to face the same issue of vets always being above noobs.  I would also think that making frontier locations special in other ways is important....like allowing faction leaders to create their own NPCs for frontier cities to hand out quests and such.

By quests...I mean a functional interaction tool.  Faction storage is linked to the NPC.  If you generate a quest for the player to acquire 10 ore and be rewarded with 10 gold....the gold is removed from storage and the ore inserted INTO it.  Automatic quest shutoff once rewards are depleted is obvious, of course.  This ideal is useful for other thing...but I think I shall simply make my own blog for this, as its been a burning ideal in my head for some time now.  I've actually sat down and worked a few hours worth of math in just resource limitations per server for it...I ought to share it in more detail.

Thu Mar 27 2008 10:21PM Report
vajuras writes:

Awesome ideas the concepts are very similar. Like you, I also think the 'frontiers' should have slightly more expensive materials.

I know this isnt obvious to new players and the PVE focused ones. They think we are making it impossible for them to get caught up. But we both understand that they can simply trade for items from dangerous locales.

You and Tatum should for sure write some blogs. I'm lonely here [mmorpg.com blogs]. We need to get some more sandbox thinkers united

I like your ideas all the way btw. I first started off with your concept for PVP then gradually settled on the more structed FvF one

Heeroboya doesnt seem to be making an appearance here but he wrote excellet blogs on FvF as well. His ideas are sort of hybridy (more of a combo of sandbox+linear) but no less good.

Think I've seen you post around here tho---

http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/heerobya/022008/1204_On-the-bandwagon

Thu Mar 27 2008 10:47PM Report
hanshotfirst writes:

The game you're proposing still has progression.

If I can gain territory I didn't have at character creation, that's progression. If I can acquire loot I didn't have at character creation, that's progression. If I can amass riches I didn't have at character creation, that's progression.

Without progression there is no achievement.

If there's any advantage whatsoever that can only be achieved via gameplay and not simply summoned at will on character creation, then that's progression.

You're just swapping XP for loot, resources, land, wealth, or faction standings — which short of being completely meaningless, I assure you people will still "grind" to acquire.

Thu Mar 27 2008 11:40PM Report
Tatum writes:

Yea, templates would be my solution as well.  Anyone thats intimidated by the character creation process could have several different templates to choose from that they could either modify or use as is.  Honestly, I really don't see a flaw with this idea, seems like it would be a perfect solution.

Gishgeron, I like your idea of faction quests.  Actually, I think thats exactly how quests should work, as part of the system.  Theres a REAL input and output.  The ore doesn't just vanish and the quest rewards don't just appear from no where.

vajuras, PvP style is definately the tough question.  I could see why you'd want to go more towards FFA, as thats sort of the holy grail of MMO PvP.  Just seems like it's a tricky thing to nail down.  This is one area where I really thought Darkfall had the idea nailed down.  You have Faction vs Faction, you can declare Guild vs Guild, and you can, technically, attack everyone else as well, you just suffer severe consequences. 

That really opens up a lot of possibilities.  The key, IMO, would be to make the consequences severe enough to deter nearly all of the players from breaking the rules.  Once you've cut the PK numbers down to almost nothing you'd really find out which players are determined to play the "outlaws".  That could add a nice touch to the game.  Just enough outlaws out there to keep things interesting, but not enough to knock everything out of balance.  Plus, you could have player organizations for law enforcement and bounty hunting.

Thu Mar 27 2008 11:55PM Report
Tatum writes:

hanshotfirst, you're absolutely right.  However, theres a big difference (IMO) between stat progression and every other form of progression.  Stat/level progression creates a huge barrier between players based on the power of their avatar.  You can't compete, or even participate with anyone unless you're in their level range.  So, you absolutely MUST level/progress if you want to see most of the content.

With other forms of progression, you could limit the amount of power that players gain.  They may build up money, or gear, or status, but that doesn't mean they have a significant power advantage over newer players.  So really, theres nothing forcing or urging you to level/progress.  If you don't care about money or gear or status you could just log on and explore, socialize, what ever the hell you feel like.

Fri Mar 28 2008 12:04AM Report
hanshotfirst writes:

If the difference between a new player and someone who's played for weeks, months, or even years is insignificant, then where's the accomplishment? For that matter, where's the penalty for failure?

Sure, exploring has its own merit (though I'd argue it too is a form of progression), but it's also finite.

So what's left beyond socializing?

Fri Mar 28 2008 12:28AM Report
Tatum writes:

Depends on what, specifically, you're talking about.  Does your avatar have to get more powerful (stat wise) for there to be a feeling of accomplishment?  Personally, I don't think so.  You could gain staus within the game world and within the community and I'd call that an accomplishment, or progression.  You could start off as a crafter and eventually work your way up as the owner of one of the larget crafting shops on the server.  I'd call that progression.

Really, I'd prefer to see an experienced player separate themselves from the noobs based on their skill and knowledge of the game, rather than their avatars power.  This way, all of the games "content" or features are available, right from the begining.  You don't have to grind your way through X number of levels just to access the game.  

Fri Mar 28 2008 12:49AM Report
vajuras writes:

[hanshotfirst] "If the difference between a new player and someone who's played for weeks, months, or even years is insignificant, then where's the accomplishment? For that matter, where's the penalty for failure?

Sure, exploring has its own merit (though I'd argue it too is a form of progression), but it's also finite.

So what's left beyond socializing?"

Im not against progression. I'm trying to get rid of the division between veteran and newbie. Narrow it a lot more then we have now.... I'm trying to make character advancement not be such a crappola grind. There is still wealth you can accrue. It just wont make you uber. Uberness comes from helping build a wonderful city. Selfless goals. Impact.

It's okay I think I was skeptical like you when I first thought along these lines then I thought about how much fun I've had playing Starcraft, UT3, Elder Scrolls, and many other titles that had no grind for years and years. And I paiud for the expansions and Clan fees for the servers (much more money then $15 a month)

 

BTW- scratch what I said bout EVE Online being grindy... Maybe I'll go into detail much later. this game has so many toys I literally discover something new daily.......

Fri Mar 28 2008 1:36AM Report
vajuras writes:

[Tatum] "Really, I'd prefer to see an experienced player separate themselves from the noobs based on their skill and knowledge of the game, rather than their avatars power.  This way, all of the games "content" or features are available, right from the begining.  You don't have to grind your way through X number of levels just to access the game.  "

Yep, I hate having to wait and wait to get to the end. I know there are some benefits to "Gates" but Developers have really abused this concept to the max. they gate content extensively- Classes, levels, powers associated with levels, items marked with Levels, keys required to enter a raid instance, etc their sins are countless.

Just goes to show what happens to games when the "suits" are in control. Oh how I miss the good ole garage developer days! Someone was always trying something new.... Well there is still a bit of that but not in mmorpg space to a nice critical mass....

 

Fri Mar 28 2008 1:49AM Report
vajuras writes:

Nice Gish did go wrote a blog:

http://www.mmorpg.com/blogs/Gishgeron/032008/1426_The-Gish-take-on-sandbox-ideals

Looks good!

Fri Mar 28 2008 2:11AM Report
vajuras writes:

Sorry guys I've removed posts from obvious disenters of Sandbox gaming. It just doesnt add anything to the discussion when the posts get a bit angry and erratic. I wanted to keep this one clean and get a brainstorm session happening. Thanks to all the open minded readers that contributed thoughts, concerns, and feedback!

Fri Mar 28 2008 9:34PM Report
Melf_Himself writes:

My 2 cents on this one:

I think you're forgetting how much fun it is to level up in any RPG setting, whether it's MMO or not. Remember good ol' Diablo 2? I used to love levelling up, and so did most people, that's why they played it. If you had to ask me why, it was because there was also a nice shiny new skill (ie carrot) that was fun to use, just over the horizon.

It was really easy to get a character to the level cap (of course, getting the items was hard.... but let's not go there). Then it was somewhat of a race to become as uber as you can and as high as you can on the ladder before the ladder would eventually reset.

And you'd do it all over again from scratch when the ladder did reset.... because smashing through the game/levelling up was fun and challenging in itself.

So in my opinion, to maximise fun for the majority of players:

Keep levels, but make the levelling process fast, especially if you have friends. Once you're at max level, there's heaps of player driven content, all related to factional gains/conflicts. Make it easy to respec your build.

Offer actual factional victory conditions for each server, followed by a server reset.... new characters can then jump in and be on a level field with the vets, and everyone can have a blast levelling up together again.

Thoughts?

Sun Apr 27 2008 11:58PM Report
vajuras writes:

For players that want to start out weak you can let them grind if they wish. But for the others that wish to do what they want let them start out as a bonefide hero

I can almost guarantee most players will probably pick a fully specced out template first of course. Most players in mmorpg are loathe to reroll and when they do it's out of necessity of their guild, their Class sucks, or they are min/max'ing.

Many players are explorers true- so they enjoy creating alternate identies.

This concept still allows players to make a wealth of alts but removes the pain of leveling all over again....

This was really just a concept I was tossing out though- something I would play

Tue Apr 29 2008 12:18PM Report
arkaex writes:

Er, wow. I randomly stumbled onto this post (searching for blogs about progression) and your dream MMO kind of sounds like what Mortal Online plans/hopes to be.

Fri Oct 23 2009 2:15PM Report
werwere writes:

as the world's louis vuitton smallest mechanical replica handbags movement. Joaillerie gucci handbags 101 Feuille As if wafted chanel handbags on a gentle breeze, fake handbagsa leaf alights on the wrist

Tue Aug 03 2010 8:00PM Report
werwere writes:

The famous replica watches 101 watch by Jaeger, fake watches LeCoultre is equipped fake rolex with a movement that has replica rolex celebrated its 80t h birthday breitling and still appears in the Guinness Book of Records

Tue Aug 03 2010 8:00PM Report

MMORPG.com writes:
Login or Register to post a comment