This thread (Horror MMO idea) touched on something I've been thinking about on and off for a while; having a non- or almost-non-progressing character in an MMORPG. I don't know how common this is in existing MMORPG's, since my only real experience with such games are WoW, EVE and EQII, but I get the feeling that most MMORPG's emphasize the grind ladder in one way or another. So first off, has this been done? To death? If anyone can provide a link or some info I'd appreciate it. Secondly, what are the consequences of this basic design decision? I have some thoughts, but would like to get some input from others first. I'm mostly interested in what you think the gameplay effects would be and how to counter the negative ones. The commercial aspects are less interesting right now, even though they could be important enough later on if this goes further than an academic exercise in gamedesign. I'll post my own thoughts on the matter later. [Edited by - Wombah on February 5, 2006 7:39:43 PM]

The grind motivates people to do something, possibly several times, in order to attain a goal (higher level). Players will go out an kill monsters even if they have already done it before, in order to gain XP and level up. Without leveling you would need to find a new motivation for the players to do these tasks or else generate vast amount of new original content to keep them interested.

I have been having the same thoughts. Unfortunatly I don't know of any games doing this at the moment. It would be nice to get away from the stat building trend.

I worry though, that there has to be some kind of progression. In a single player game you can get away with just telling a well made story, in a MMOG you have little story control (unless the players have very little input through their actions) and the intention is to keep their interest, and to keep them playing as long as possible.

I think you need some system of advancement/reward to accomplish this. Even Tetris would become dull if the levels never changed, and the game didn't speed up. I think the concept is certianly workable, but to make it a success a lot of thought would have to be put into how the players are going to feel a sense of accomplishment, and what is going to keep them coming back.

If you ask me, MMORPGS are all about leveling and competing with others. Some would call the players who only care about these things "number crunchers" but thats the way I play and thats the way most games incourage you to play. If you took progresion out of a MMORPG, it wouldnt be a MMORPG. Aside from that, if you were to take the progresion out of the game what would be the overal goal of the game? If you ask me theres no point in playing a game where you cant advance at all. In normal games you have a storyline which provides for an overall objective. But Ive never seen a MMOG with a storyline because MMOGs never end and you cant have a story that never ends.

Im my opinion theres only one way to make a succesful non-progressing MMOG and thats to have truly adicting gameplay, where people can compete against others based on there skill level. That can mabey be acomplished in a MMOFPS but not a MMORPG.

Puzzle Pirates does something sort of like this.

Characters still progress, but not via any codified level. As players become better at the various puzzles that represent the in game actions, the better their character effects via those actions.

Collecting loot allows for purchasing clothes and swords and other stuff. Swords provide a paltry bonus to swordfighting, but all are easily available.

To really progress though, you have to work with other players. The more players you can gather, the more power/prestiege/influence you can work in the game. The more gameplay becomes available to you.

I agree. Check out Puzzle Pirates. It's a free game (unless you want to unlock the more advanced features, which requires a monthly subscription) without a level grind. In essence, the game revolves around teamwork to get tasks done on a ship. It revolves around the real-life individual puzzle-solving skill of each player aboard, not around how long they've played or whether they've managed to find some awesome loot. The motivation lies in seeing your rank in certain skills go up (which is primarily a prestige factor in the game more than anything else), helping contribute to your crew's success, and gaining gold which is used to customize your character or maybe buy a ship for yourself to captain. The game is definitely a breath of fresh air in an industry where everything seems to be a WoW clone.

We're working on a non-level-based MMO, but you still need some kind of progression, IMO. Unless it's Second Life or something (and maybe "horror mmo" might go along with a more SL design), players want to improve their characters. Even in SL, there's always something better to spend your money on, or making a better "thing" to make money on.

However, improving a character is not always all about the levels. The RPG Dungeons and Dragons has levels, but Her System has character points. There's diceless Amber, and many other systems. Try researching those to see if any would work for the thing you (designer) want.

Improving could be in many areas. Reputations around the game world, more "loot" objects, or things I haven't thought of.

Social games like Second Life and There are a few MMO that don't have levels (I'm not 100% sure on this, since I haven't played either & have only read about them).

Quote:

Original post by Obscure Without leveling you would need to find a new motivation for the players to do these tasks or else generate vast amount of new original content to keep them interested.

I strongly agree, simple social interaction (chatting) can be done w/o the latest graphics/physics/etc engines and there needs to be motivation. I do believe that theses reasons can be simpler than the "level grind", but have to be rich enough to keep players engaged w/o creating a new grind (exploring is a great motive at first, until the player has see it all). Second Life allows players to create their own content and sell it to other players (clearly this isn't something that could/should be put into every game, it's also worth noting that SL money is strongly linked to RL money which in itself a motivation).

Removing the level system from a RPG setting, will require leap forward in technology and design. Personally I think that dynamic game world have the potential for creating some of the motivation needed to keep people engaged w/o a need for grind.

Some interesting related links from Raph Koster:
"Do levels suck? Part I" & "Do levels suck? Part II"

Great responses. And quick. I haven't got the well formulated response I'd hoped to give yet, but I feel I have to jot down what I got so far.

@ Lost
Great links. Thx.

This section more or less sums it up for me:

Quote:

Quoted from Timothy Burke; World Persistence: One In A Series of Queries For me, the holy grail question about MMOG design centers on the vesting of persistence in the world itself rather than in the characters. Almost everything I find unsatisfying, both as player and as scholar of MMOGs, has to do with the almost complete lack of dynamism in synthetic worlds themselves, that the only thing which changes, grows, reflects persistence, is the character.

Here are some random thoughts I have so far. I'll try to formulate them better tomorrow.

The (mostly) good

Strategy/tactics:
Get some skill in the game

Say you make a game where there are a great number of possible characters, all with different pro's and con's, much like most PnP RPG's (excluding AD&D and other class/level systems). My favourite example would probably be Shadowrun. In this type of game you have some small character development, both in skills/stats, gear and other fields, but the development is very small compared to the strategy that goes into creating your character in the first place. You always have to make small compromises and strategic choices since you cannot just aim at one day maxing all stats out.

That strategic element could make the game a little more interesting in and of itself. Skill is sadly lacking in current MMO's other than as a tiebreaker. You can be an expert stun-locker or root-blaster or whatever in WoW, but if your opponent has better equipment, you're more or less toast anyway. But if the system is built with the rock-paper-scissors principle you get a more strategic element. And if you can't just level up and drastically improve your stats, you'll just have to make the best out of what you've got.

Add to this some other gameplay elements than combat and players can choose their own style of play. Let the sneaky player actually use sneak to solve something other than just sneaking up to deliver a blow e.g....

Player differentiation:
Stop the clones

Another effect I think would come from focusing on the strategy in the game is that it is suddenly more interesting to test other types of characters than the standard 'tank warrior', 'stunlock rogue' or 'feral druid' etc. You could possibly get a sort of edge in the game simply by being different. That would help with the problem of several hundred more or less identical warriors running around, all trying vainly to feel special.
[EDIT]
What I mean to say is that if doing something non-standard during character creation does not potentially set you back several gaming hours compared to other players, you can afford to experiment more. This will give fewer identical characters.
[/EDIT]

Player accomplishment:
Let players feel proud of their accomplishments

If you do not have to spend several weeks on leveling your character up, it is not as hard a blow to loose it either, opening up for permadeath or some other form of death other than just taking some equipment damage. If a starting PC is almost as powerful as a veteran PC, and you only get to be veteran by not dying, then that also means that the veteran PC has actually achieved something. This is not the case in MMO's today. A lvl 60 PC only means that that player has spent more time in front of the computer than me, not that s/he has done anything better than me and my lvl 20 character. Think of it as a form of highscore.


The (mostly) bad

Dynamic world
Players need something to do

Now, as people has already touched upon, there need to be other things for players to do if they have no ladder to grind. This more or less means some form of dynamic world which is not an easy thing to do. But this has its additional benefits. If we say that a changing character in a static world is roughly equivalent to a static player in a changing world as far as activating the player goes you still get the inherent benefits from the dynamic world itself.
* The game feels fresh since it is in flux
* The new challenges that players face are really new, instead of something that a thousand players have faced before (and written walkthroughs for)

So how can it be done?

A simple and probably inadequate form of dynamics would be if the game is run in cycles of about a month. During each month the game plays as most MMO's do now, with mobs spawning in their designated places and so on. But during that month you keep track of what happens and adjust the world accordingly the next month. If e.g. a large number of orcs are killed during a month, they fall back the next month, or maybe even migrate wholly. This is a small form of dynamics, but it is still a step in he right direction and it shows that it could probably be done.

Add to this a (mostly) player run economic system and good facilities for community politics and already you beat WoW and EQ in terms of a dynamic world. EVE does a fairly good job of the player run economy and politics, but it could be so much more...

[EDIT]
This got much longer than i planned. Sry if I don't make sense.
[/EDIT]

[Edited by - Wombah on February 5, 2006 10:45:51 PM]

I think its all about the rate at which a users satisfaction is gained. In a FPS, satisfaction is immediate, they shoot things, those things die, they prove their l33t skill. In an RPG, they grind and grind over a longer period of time to get that really cool gear, or that awsome set of skills, or both. Since MMO's cost a wad of cash to maintain, its obvious companies will go with what engages players the longest, and thus provide the most money.

What FPS's need (as i see them as a stat-less medium), is a means to engage the player on multiple levels other than just combat. Mediums such as Stealth like the Thief series, Arx Fatalis's magic system, etc. basically requiring the player to utilize assorted other skills and mini-game experiences other than combat to engage and interact with the world in order to achieve satisfaction.

Even with all that though players will still need a reason to keep playing past their own immediate satisfaction, and i think the answer lies in surperfluous content that players may never see. There were a myriad of little secrets and area's designers would often put into their games in the old days, some that players were very unlikely to ever find or experience. When dealing with a large number of players in a sustained world having such little quirks and area's, while only benefiting a few, could serve as an incentive to the overall population to keep on playing on the chance they might discover this unusual and unique content that few others have seen. In this sense, the player could be enticed to continue playing past his initial satisfaction to get a bigger, more satisfying payoff by finding a piece of unique content that no one else may have experienced.

In this sense satisfaction can be maintained not be making gallons of new content, maps, and experiences for all the players, but by creating small pockets of new content/area's and hiding them/making them randomly accessed as incentive to continue playing. Though that doesn't mean new content and/or expansions shouldn't continue to be made for all.