"With a well designed horizontal progression system, a player can choose to go whatever direction they want. Single target vs aoe. Direct damage vs damage over time. Steady versus burst. Glass canon versus tanky. Hell, maybe you want to through some support abilities in there and specialise in slows / debuffs."
sounds more like you want a game without progression... where do those abilities come from? everyone has em? from start? shesh.... yea. players will be bored after half a year, bc there is nothing new to "farm", no more items to "grind", and no more levels to gain
I want progression, I just don't want to progress in power, only in specialising.
I'm not certain the best way to grant new abilities. I'm a big fan of having lots of abilities, so I think in my ideal scenario it would go something like this:
Toolbars allow maximum 20 skills to be slotted (you can have other toolbars for pots, mounts etc) You start the game with 5 skills, those 5 allow you to achieve 100% power but in a limited way.
There are 20 levels, each level up unlocks 1 new skill. There are 20 achievements that also unlock 1 new skill each There are a further 10 skills that can be unlocked in other ways (e.g. killing a boss, or exploring 100% of an area, whatever fits with the content)
Something along those lines anyway. Gives you plenty to unlock from a variety of methods. The limited toolbar forces you to make important choices whilst still being flexible enough / large enough to enable deep combat.
Doesn't all have to be skill unlocks. If there is a good trait system in the game, then you can also have a load of progression tied to traits. Lets say you can equip 5 traits, each player starts with 5 and then has a further 50 to unlock through gameplay.
It sounds to me like you've never played a game with horizontal progression, or at least not recognised it as horizontal progression. It actually exists in loads of genres, it's just rare in RPGs.
Horizontal progression still gives you loads of stuff to aim for, your character still advances, you still unlock things. You just don't gain power. Thats the only difference. Players with a very limited experience can find this daunting, but that only happens if the game is poorly designed. If you can start the game at 100% power AND complete all the content, then sure, horizontal progression would be a failure. But, that is why I said that you cannot just change the progression mechanics without also looking at the game as a whole. Specifically combat and difficulty, if you are unable to set the difficulty via stats then it has to come through gameplay, and that gameplay might mandate certain builds/specs/whatever, thus giving a goal to progress towards.
If you want a good example of horizontal progression that works, look no further than your average shooter. A sniper is not "better" than an assault rifle. In some situations sure, in others definitely not. This is horizontal progression at work. It is providing goals (unlocking weapons) without those unlocks granting more power. The unlocks provide choice to the players, a choice to find their own playstyle and the right tools for the job at hand. (and yes, i know that shooters also have some vertical progression too as weapons in the same class might be direct upgrades. however, the power gaps are still kept really small).
In MMO land, the only one I've played that used horizontal progression was LotRO, and it only had it at endgame during Shadows of Angmar. The four endgame sets (crafted, helegrod, rift, pvp) were all roughly equivalent but suited for different purposes. This gave the players choice, not only for how they geared up from the method of gearing up. This then reduced the barrier to entry to endgame, increasing the size of the endgame community. There were still goals to work towards without the power balance getting screwed. Interestingly enough, the first expansion shifted us to vertical progression at endgame and it immediately killed off 40-50% of the endgame community. The difference was astonishing, horizontal progression was vastly superior for everyone involved.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Scaling alleviated the detriment of stat gaps in PvE, though. So it really is a PvP-centered issue.
There was push back against Blizzard for normalizing power among participants in PvP battlegrounds.
In my opinion, stat gaps aren't a matter of objective improvement. There's preference that comes into play. Kano won't play a game that he doesn't feel let's his character get noticeably stronger, for example.
Scaling alleviated the detriment of stat gaps in PvE, though. So it really is a PvP-centered issue.
There was push back against Blizzard for normalizing power among participants in PvP battlegrounds.
In my opinion, stat gaps aren't a matter of objective improvement. There's preference that comes into play. Kano won't play a game that he doesn't feel let's his character get noticeably stronger, for example.
Like I said, the numbers addiction is a huge thing for some people. If scaling from the strength of one newb to a full party of newbs (the biggest gap I'd say is realistic before accounting for player skill) is not noticeably stronger for someone then I would say that sentiment is most likely drawn from a numbers addiction.
But I'll go back again to the argument. Why design and pay for two systems that negate eachother? If the leveling and the scaling perfectly cancel eachother out, then they may as well not exist.
Personally, talking purely from a PVE perspective. If you're going to reward me I want my reward. I'd rather have a reasonable reward that does not break the game and thus can be constantly used, than a ridiculous reward you have to take back away from me to avoid breaking many major game areas.
Scaling alleviated the detriment of stat gaps in PvE, though. So it really is a PvP-centered issue.
There was push back against Blizzard for normalizing power among participants in PvP battlegrounds.
In my opinion, stat gaps aren't a matter of objective improvement. There's preference that comes into play. Kano won't play a game that he doesn't feel let's his character get noticeably stronger, for example.
Like I said, the numbers addiction is a huge thing for some people. If scaling from the strength of one newb to a full party of newbs (the biggest gap I'd say is realistic before accounting for player skill) is not noticeably stronger for someone then I would say that sentiment is most likely drawn from a numbers addiction.
But I'll go back again to the argument. Why design and pay for two systems that negate eachother? If the leveling and the scaling perfectly cancel eachother out, then they may as well not exist.
Personally, talking purely from a PVE perspective. If you're going to reward me I want my reward. I'd rather have a reasonable reward that does not break the game and thus can be constantly used, than a ridiculous reward you have to take back away from me to avoid breaking many major game areas.
Because, psychologically, it seems to be effective to show progression but then scale when convenient to the player. That's really the best answer I have for that ha!
Frodo however, started with a very high level item (The one ring) and acquired two more shortly into his journey (The mithril coat and sting). The rest started with crap.
Sam, Merry and Pippin may have started with crap, but they quickly obtained Barrow Blades (Daggers of Westernesse) in the Barrow Downs with the assistance of Tom Bombadil. These were far from crap, as the Witch King of Angmar will attest.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
So essentially it's to feed the numbers addiction without effectively changing gameplay. The problem with such a system/counter-system for me is that I'm the type of person who likes to spend a lot of time considering and customizing my builds.
Beyond wasting game resources on two systems that render each other redundant, it creates a lot of noise and I have to do a lot more to cut through the bullcrap and figure out my character's real strength. Especially in the frequent case the two systems don't render eachother entirely redundant.
So I heavily prefer a system where what you see is what you get instead of playing mind games.
I also just find the whole process is very meta and it breaks immersion.
So essentially it's to feed the numbers addiction without effectively changing gameplay. The problem with such a system/counter-system for me is that I'm the type of person who likes to spend a lot of time considering and customizing my builds.
Beyond wasting game resources on two systems that render each other redundant, it creates a lot of noise and I have to do a lot more to cut through the bullcrap and figure out my character's real strength. Especially in the frequent case the two systems don't render eachother entirely redundant.
So I heavily prefer a system where what you see is what you get instead of playing mind games.
I also just find the whole process is very meta and it breaks immersion.
It is, but I think its usefulness is in making the grind more appealing. If we all had a live DM assigned to our group dynamically creating content, there would be no need for the carrot on the stick. I'm just not sure how you keep folks slogging through static content in today's MMORPGs without dangling something at the other end of the XP bar.
I think Guild Wars 1 which was a very popular game before they stopped creating new expansions for us amply demonstrates that for a huge portion of players, any carrot will do. The armor you get halfway through the game was the best in the game.
However there were multiple sets of armor that were significantly harder to earn. Statistically they were identical, visually they were very different.
I and many of my friends worked our butts off to earn higher sets of armor. Despite no statistical advantage it was a status symbol. Much like the idea, is a tuxedo really superior to other forms of clothing? More comfortable? More functional? Not really, in most instances it is probably inferior. A tuxedo is certainly not going to be your first choice for hiking in the woods. It probably will not keep you warmer in cold places, or cooler in warm places than much more casual clothing.
A tuxedo is valuable. And it looks sharp. It's a status symbol. Therefore people want it.
Sharper looking armor is an effective carrot. Hard to achieve titles are an effective carrot. Special mounts and pets that are only different cosmetically are an effective carrot. In a game with character levels many people don't care if level 100 is 5% stronger, 50% stronger, 500% stronger, or 50,000,000% stronger than a level one. They care that it says level 100 over their heads and that makes them "better" than people who are level one.
People want that "Legendary Survivor" title with their full faction armor and the mini-dragon pet even if it doesn't actually make them stronger than person with the generic title everyone gets at level one, rusty chainmail and the wolf pet they got in the tutorial. It's about status.
Frodo however, started with a very high level item (The one ring) and acquired two more shortly into his journey (The mithril coat and sting). The rest started with crap.
Sam, Merry and Pippin may have started with crap, but they quickly obtained Barrow Blades (Daggers of Westernesse) in the Barrow Downs with the assistance of Tom Bombadil. These were far from crap, as the Witch King of Angmar will attest.
Tom Bombadil was a notorious twinker. That got him booted out of a movie.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I think Guild Wars 1 which was a very popular game before they stopped creating new expansions for us amply demonstrates that for a huge portion of players, any carrot will do. The armor you get halfway through the game was the best in the game.
However there were multiple sets of armor that were significantly harder to earn. Statistically they were identical, visually they were very different.
I and many of my friends worked our butts off to earn higher sets of armor. Despite no statistical advantage it was a status symbol. Much like the idea, is a tuxedo really superior to other forms of clothing? More comfortable? More functional? Not really, in most instances it is probably inferior. A tuxedo is certainly not going to be your first choice for hiking in the woods. It probably will not keep you warmer in cold places, or cooler in warm places than much more casual clothing.
A tuxedo is valuable. And it looks sharp. It's a status symbol. Therefore people want it.
Sharper looking armor is an effective carrot. Hard to achieve titles are an effective carrot. Special mounts and pets that are only different cosmetically are an effective carrot. In a game with character levels many people don't care if level 100 is 5% stronger, 50% stronger, 500% stronger, or 50,000,000% stronger than a level one. They care that it says level 100 over their heads and that makes them "better" than people who are level one.
People want that "Legendary Survivor" title with their full faction armor and the mini-dragon pet even if it doesn't actually make them stronger than person with the generic title everyone gets at level one, rusty chainmail and the wolf pet they got in the tutorial. It's about status.
Unfortunately, that ship has largely sailed.
Devs took the in-game status symbol and attached out of game status symbols to them by designating aesthetics as their go-to cash shop items.
Making those things a reward for gameplay means devs have to find another ezpz way to make extra cash off gamers after they've sold them the game itself.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
While I don't consider it an ideal solution there are multiple examples outside the MMO space of the cash shop cosmetics and in-game rewards working side-by-side.
For instance in SMITE you can earn the currency used to buy new skins in-game. You can also just pay for it.
For PUBG you earn crates full of gear in-game but some crates are unlocked by keys bought with cash. You can also sell those crates and items to other players.
Within the MMO space Runescape seems like a good example of another way of doing it. Some cosmetic rewards are earned in-game. Some can be bought with cash.
For instance this is something I worked quite hard for:
Earning that in-game means getting a certain summoning level, finding a certain item, raising the pet etc. It does nothing for you, it just looks good. I still really wanted it.
That's a pure cash shop item bought with cash shop currency.
Now of course Runescape is a heavy grinder with total DBZ progression. But it also has a lot of examples of progression that is 100% status symbol. Some earned in-game, some earned with cash, and those two systems working side-by-side.
You are lvl1 hitting a 100hp mob with a 10damage weapon.
You are lvl100 hitting a 10000hp mob with a 1000damage weapon.
Where is the difference? Its all in the peoples minds that they get stronger.
IMHO progressing through new appearance, new skills that are different but not stronger and titles may be enough to keep people interested. Its just, no one after GW1 tried it.
GW1 also showed that it is possible to create lots of different skills with synergies, or that allow to play classes differently and still keep the classes identity.
IMO a new GW1 but with open world would be hilarious.
Add some more features that force more social interaction (skill trainers not always stand at the same place), global chat costs Mana (like in Meridian59)) and I'll be happy again.
That's not entirely true, the real issue is that raid rewards allow gamers to trivialize group/solo/regular world content due to huge stat bonuses. Add PvP to the mix and you get even more issues. Aside from the power gap, you are also forcing people to do content they abhor in order to compete with the only other options being to re-roll alts or quit the game till a new expansion or another game comes along. The real irony is that raiding is a niche play style and yet it gets top billing in just about every game whether they are suppose to cater to casual or hardcore gamers.
I think the case is settle since rpg was dropped from mmorpg. What little rpg is left is so sophomoric and lowbrow it is doesn't matter if it is removed or not. I think this is the outcome of two things - a focus on making games fun to watch over fun to play, and a focus on broadening audiences to a ridiculous degree, including little kids. These go hand in hand since little kids (I hope) are the majority of game watchers.
For me, I can't play a game without a decent character development system so that rules out pretty much every major game and mmo, whether they consider themselves to be mmorpgs or not. DDO is a great example of good character development systems. WoW up through WotLK would be a decent example. WoW now is just pure kids game with no complexity or systems of note. Skill based games with no skill caps are the same to me as games with no character development since everyone ends up exactly the same.
I think it is important for most characters to feel stronger and progress that way. What another poster alluded to was that in games like Wow I felt like the power slope increased at the same slope as enemies so you basically don't feel relatively stronger and that is lame.
@Eldurian wants the power gap to be a much smaller slope which is nice to have.
At the end of the day, devs will cater to their audience, I have realised I'm no longer their audience. I'd be more tempted by a game with more horizontal progression than straight vertical.
Actually a good game for this is sort of Mortal Online but population sucks.
Also, entropia power gap is steep from noob to uber but a lvl 40 combat class can do some real damage to a level 80 combat class. Thry wont win unless lucky or they catch em off guard, but a few level 40s can take out a level 80 easily if setup properly. But entropia has a whole host of other problems.
Cryomatrix
Catch me streaming at twitch.tv/cryomatrix You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
This guy makes a post basically about how much he personally dislikes character progression wrapped in passive aggressive arguments with anyone that explains why its an important and fundamental part of a massively multiplayer game.
Seems like most people realize who the trolls here are so I'm not really going to bother trying to refute posts that offer insults instead of arguments.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Progression that is reset every 20-60 minutes is hardly comparable to being able to effortlessly destroy people because you started the game 2 years before them. LoL is as much a progression based game as Age of Empires. The attempts to justify your position seem desperate and reek of denial.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
I'm aware of how a MOBA works. Advancement is part of the skill of the match just like in most RTS titles. The constant resets allow that to be a skill you build and improve upon over time. MMOs like most other RPGs are never reset making it completely uncomparable.
What it is comparable to is games like Age of Empires Online where they allow you to build items and upgrades that carry over from match to match. Despite being very similar to every other Age of Empires in most regards it didn't take it long to go under. Because people wanted that full reset at the end of each match.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
It’s Just Like Practicing Guitar! The More You Do The Better You Get!
Except it’s not. But I can tell you what is.
When you play a lot of StarCraft or Halo and get good at the game, that is just like practicing guitar. Time investment pays off with more skill. But it’s more than just time investment. Someone who just sits there and plays “Hot Cross Buns” for 10,000 hours cannot just suddenly switch over to playing “Through The Fire and Flames”.
To advance they must push their envelope constantly and seek challenges worthy of their skill level. That is the way you master anything. As a StarCraft player advances through the leagues they learn more advanced strategies and face more powerful opponents who present a greater challenge and this is what pushes their skill level to its limits. They don’t 3 pool rush over and over and over with no adaptations or advancements to their strategy and suddenly become the best Star Craft player.
In Dragonball Z progression, running through the motions doing the easiest content available to you for 10,000 hours absolutely will enable you to beat someone who pushes their limits but has a much lower level or gearscore.
So skill based gameplay that must be mastered perfectly simulates practicing guitar. Dragonball Z progression perfectly simulates a participation trophy.
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Comments
I'm not certain the best way to grant new abilities. I'm a big fan of having lots of abilities, so I think in my ideal scenario it would go something like this:
Toolbars allow maximum 20 skills to be slotted (you can have other toolbars for pots, mounts etc)
You start the game with 5 skills, those 5 allow you to achieve 100% power but in a limited way.
There are 20 levels, each level up unlocks 1 new skill.
There are 20 achievements that also unlock 1 new skill each
There are a further 10 skills that can be unlocked in other ways (e.g. killing a boss, or exploring 100% of an area, whatever fits with the content)
Something along those lines anyway. Gives you plenty to unlock from a variety of methods. The limited toolbar forces you to make important choices whilst still being flexible enough / large enough to enable deep combat.
Doesn't all have to be skill unlocks. If there is a good trait system in the game, then you can also have a load of progression tied to traits. Lets say you can equip 5 traits, each player starts with 5 and then has a further 50 to unlock through gameplay.
It sounds to me like you've never played a game with horizontal progression, or at least not recognised it as horizontal progression. It actually exists in loads of genres, it's just rare in RPGs.
Horizontal progression still gives you loads of stuff to aim for, your character still advances, you still unlock things. You just don't gain power. Thats the only difference. Players with a very limited experience can find this daunting, but that only happens if the game is poorly designed. If you can start the game at 100% power AND complete all the content, then sure, horizontal progression would be a failure. But, that is why I said that you cannot just change the progression mechanics without also looking at the game as a whole. Specifically combat and difficulty, if you are unable to set the difficulty via stats then it has to come through gameplay, and that gameplay might mandate certain builds/specs/whatever, thus giving a goal to progress towards.
If you want a good example of horizontal progression that works, look no further than your average shooter. A sniper is not "better" than an assault rifle. In some situations sure, in others definitely not. This is horizontal progression at work. It is providing goals (unlocking weapons) without those unlocks granting more power. The unlocks provide choice to the players, a choice to find their own playstyle and the right tools for the job at hand. (and yes, i know that shooters also have some vertical progression too as weapons in the same class might be direct upgrades. however, the power gaps are still kept really small).
In MMO land, the only one I've played that used horizontal progression was LotRO, and it only had it at endgame during Shadows of Angmar. The four endgame sets (crafted, helegrod, rift, pvp) were all roughly equivalent but suited for different purposes. This gave the players choice, not only for how they geared up from the method of gearing up. This then reduced the barrier to entry to endgame, increasing the size of the endgame community. There were still goals to work towards without the power balance getting screwed. Interestingly enough, the first expansion shifted us to vertical progression at endgame and it immediately killed off 40-50% of the endgame community. The difference was astonishing, horizontal progression was vastly superior for everyone involved.
There was push back against Blizzard for normalizing power among participants in PvP battlegrounds.
In my opinion, stat gaps aren't a matter of objective improvement. There's preference that comes into play. Kano won't play a game that he doesn't feel let's his character get noticeably stronger, for example.
But I'll go back again to the argument. Why design and pay for two systems that negate eachother? If the leveling and the scaling perfectly cancel eachother out, then they may as well not exist.
Personally, talking purely from a PVE perspective. If you're going to reward me I want my reward. I'd rather have a reasonable reward that does not break the game and thus can be constantly used, than a ridiculous reward you have to take back away from me to avoid breaking many major game areas.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Beyond wasting game resources on two systems that render each other redundant, it creates a lot of noise and I have to do a lot more to cut through the bullcrap and figure out my character's real strength. Especially in the frequent case the two systems don't render eachother entirely redundant.
So I heavily prefer a system where what you see is what you get instead of playing mind games.
I also just find the whole process is very meta and it breaks immersion.
However there were multiple sets of armor that were significantly harder to earn. Statistically they were identical, visually they were very different.
I and many of my friends worked our butts off to earn higher sets of armor. Despite no statistical advantage it was a status symbol. Much like the idea, is a tuxedo really superior to other forms of clothing? More comfortable? More functional? Not really, in most instances it is probably inferior. A tuxedo is certainly not going to be your first choice for hiking in the woods. It probably will not keep you warmer in cold places, or cooler in warm places than much more casual clothing.
A tuxedo is valuable. And it looks sharp. It's a status symbol. Therefore people want it.
Sharper looking armor is an effective carrot. Hard to achieve titles are an effective carrot. Special mounts and pets that are only different cosmetically are an effective carrot. In a game with character levels many people don't care if level 100 is 5% stronger, 50% stronger, 500% stronger, or 50,000,000% stronger than a level one. They care that it says level 100 over their heads and that makes them "better" than people who are level one.
People want that "Legendary Survivor" title with their full faction armor and the mini-dragon pet even if it doesn't actually make them stronger than person with the generic title everyone gets at level one, rusty chainmail and the wolf pet they got in the tutorial. It's about status.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
Devs took the in-game status symbol and attached out of game status symbols to them by designating aesthetics as their go-to cash shop items.
Making those things a reward for gameplay means devs have to find another ezpz way to make extra cash off gamers after they've sold them the game itself.
Sure, there's some vertical, but once capped you really just train for different ships or activities, and not any real progression.
There is no one ship, weapon, defense to trump every situation and IMO CCP has done a good job of neutralizing FOTM builds across the years.
Heck so good that after getting nerfed a few times I decided to train a pilot or two on almost every hull and weapon in the game.
Now I can instantly flip to a new build, well unless they toss in new ships like T3 dessies.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
For instance in SMITE you can earn the currency used to buy new skins in-game. You can also just pay for it.
For PUBG you earn crates full of gear in-game but some crates are unlocked by keys bought with cash. You can also sell those crates and items to other players.
Within the MMO space Runescape seems like a good example of another way of doing it. Some cosmetic rewards are earned in-game. Some can be bought with cash.
For instance this is something I worked quite hard for:
Saradomin Owl
Earning that in-game means getting a certain summoning level, finding a certain item, raising the pet etc. It does nothing for you, it just looks good. I still really wanted it.
I also really wanted this:
Serene Gaze
That is a reward for paying the subscription for long enough. You do nothing for it in-game its a reward for spending money on the game.
I also wanted this:
Icyenic Wings
That's a pure cash shop item bought with cash shop currency.
Now of course Runescape is a heavy grinder with total DBZ progression. But it also has a lot of examples of progression that is 100% status symbol. Some earned in-game, some earned with cash, and those two systems working side-by-side.
That's not entirely true, the real issue is that raid rewards allow gamers to trivialize group/solo/regular world content due to huge stat bonuses. Add PvP to the mix and you get even more issues. Aside from the power gap, you are also forcing people to do content they abhor in order to compete with the only other options being to re-roll alts or quit the game till a new expansion or another game comes along. The real irony is that raiding is a niche play style and yet it gets top billing in just about every game whether they are suppose to cater to casual or hardcore gamers.
For me, I can't play a game without a decent character development system so that rules out pretty much every major game and mmo, whether they consider themselves to be mmorpgs or not. DDO is a great example of good character development systems. WoW up through WotLK would be a decent example. WoW now is just pure kids game with no complexity or systems of note. Skill based games with no skill caps are the same to me as games with no character development since everyone ends up exactly the same.
@Eldurian wants the power gap to be a much smaller slope which is nice to have.
At the end of the day, devs will cater to their audience, I have realised I'm no longer their audience. I'd be more tempted by a game with more horizontal progression than straight vertical.
Actually a good game for this is sort of Mortal Online but population sucks.
Also, entropia power gap is steep from noob to uber but a lvl 40 combat class can do some real damage to a level 80 combat class. Thry wont win unless lucky or they catch em off guard, but a few level 40s can take out a level 80 easily if setup properly. But entropia has a whole host of other problems.
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
Its a highly functioning troll post.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
What it is comparable to is games like Age of Empires Online where they allow you to build items and upgrades that carry over from match to match. Despite being very similar to every other Age of Empires in most regards it didn't take it long to go under. Because people wanted that full reset at the end of each match.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.
Somebody, somewhere has better skills as you have, more experience as you have, is smarter than you, has more friends as you do and can stay online longer. Just pray he's not out to get you.