It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Wondered what the consensus on hell levels are? Seems that these have been identified as one of the aspects of EQ that were rightfully 'retired' in future games as they were not player friendly and they made people ragequit. Within the following paragraphs I hope to explain why I thought they were a good idea.
Firstly, each game has a set amount of time to achieve maximum level. In my experience every game since EQ has had a levelling curve that was simply too quick or easy (for example, I hit 80th level in GW2 6 days after release). Hell levels added a road bump in the levelling process and provided a window were the levelling speeds slowed and brought the community together as slower levellers caught up with the quick levellers. I know on VZ, possibly due to the team ruleset, when I hit max level I went to certain camps and buffed people to help them along.
Hell levels were a pain in the arse but they were there for all and they forced people to explore the world or exchange information in order to hit 'sweet spots' to minimise the impact of such levels. Camps within the game became known for each hell level and, on Vallon Zek (my server), intense pvp would happen over these spots. I presume on the PVE servers there were lengthy queues for these camp spots. I know that I sat at zone in Lower Guk waiting for spots to open and chatted to people and built groups at the zone in to xp whilst we waited. In no game since have I felt the need to group whilst I level to max and my involvement with the community has been limited to my RL friends in game and to a certain extent my guild (if I could be bothered to join one).
I know I am likely to be flamed (as I was in SWTOR forums previously) but I really feel that whilst I hated them in game (at the time) they were actually a positive thing for building the community and encouraging group play due to the better xp gain per hour provided by group play.
So, what do others think?
Comments
Doesn't matter really because Smed has hinted at harsher rule servers more akin to EQ, don't like them then people don't have to play on those types of servers.
This...I think Id prefer to have no levels just open world and fear and consequences
Even UO had "traditional level based character progression" - they just called them "skills."
EQNext will only be truly innovative and unique if they remove linear statistical progression... which they won't.
So you'll have some form of "levels" be they skills or actual levels or box's and skill points or xp etc. etc.
I never want to see these brought back in any game. Hell levels drove me nuts, you do not need hell levels to feel like you have reached a goal. Going from 1 - 100 is quite enough for me, now I wouldn't mind seeing hell levels when it comes to AA's as a form of end game as long as they make it worth while.
This...
Why do people not want to level? I want the old EQ treadmill because it gives me time to enjoy and explore all of the content. It lets me use my gear for more then an hour before I become under geared. Why do you want to be the best at the very start, why must every ones damage be balanced?
I again want to play an EQ where there are roles that must be filled, and groups to find. I want those camps that last why into the night resulting in a level, skills sometimes gear but more importantly the forging of friendships. I had a huge friends list in EQ, people I talked to every day, some I still do, but that has not happened it a single other game and I believe its because we do not depend on each other. Games move way to fast.
Yup. Kind of funny how bugs and other kind of flaws and unexpected uses turned out to be great features. I am sure if devs have had better control, EQ would never have shined so much haha. That could be a good lesson for todays devs, not that they should make strange mechanics, but to acknowledge that overly designed and controlled games easily become dull.
Anyways, all these things people take from EQ and want/hope will be in EqNext.. I think You should stop trying to fool Yourself, EqNext will not have any of those EQ features, EqNext will not be anywhere close to EQ, its a completely new game. All You can hope for is that some of the spirit remains and shows in the new systems EqNext will present, but specific features no. There will be instant travel, there will not be harsh death penalties, it will not be group centric, there will be instances and/or phasing, and so on.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
Yes please, do bring hell levels back. It's going to be tough obstacles to climb, but once over it, I want the yay feeling knowing that things will get slightly easier again.
If only on "EQ1 Hardcore" servers, then fine. That's where I intend to play anyway.
Yeah. A lot of game mechanics were bugs or unintentional (ie FD pulling) by the designers.
Ive told my this a million time, and will till I see details Aug 2nd. But from the tweets to the stories they have posted on the eq next webpage why would it not be. Why post videos on the everquest next site that talks about corpse runs and camping for 2 days to get something if you have no intentions of making it a part of you game.
Hmm well if that is the case I guess You could be right. The few things I have read didn't indicate that they will re-implement any of those old EQ features, only that they "recognize and remember them", but I will gladly stand corrected, no I would be ecstatic if it was so.
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0
I would like it too. There are plenty of fast leveling games for those who want them. Then again, I don't need everything NOW.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Every level should be a hell level.
The 5 level cycle in EQ was a well-documented bug. Good riddance.
Agree to all levels should be hell
He hinted at harsher rule servers before the EQ/EQ2 evolution of EQNext got outright scrapped. That EQNext no longer exists.
if its not lvls then its skills and id rather not i havent seen a skill based game ever done right for a mmorpg
Why should leveling be the focus?
It really takes some kind of faith or unrealistic belief to actually believe everything that comes out of that guys mouth when he has proven what he says can't be trusted.
But given that, you go as far as believing what he "Hints at" . Really? Seems to be a bit of a stretch.
I know what you said, but it would make it the focus. When all you do is non-stop leveling, it inevitably becomes the focus. It was the focus in Everquest when people would spend 'just a little longer' to achieve their level, only to then lose it by dying and then having to go at it again.
For me i never understood why you even had levels in Vanilla-EQ. It felt more like a restriction of places where you could go grinding. Your performance was mostly influenced by the right choice of you race and the gear you carried. And since most non-raiding gear was tradeable, you could equip yourself quite well if you played the trading game.
Most MMO´s today give me the feeling that you don´t need levels at all, only a very good designed tutorial of how to play you class and role. And of course a real thought out concept what the game is really about that you wanna log in every day and can just enjoy it.