Fun debate
keep in mind that the 1st 10 levels might be Free To Play for peoples not familiar with the genre to get to see what it is like. If someone get a trial version of the game and accomplish nothing out of 2-3 say 4 hours gaming session in term of leveling what will they think.
1st few levels should be a quick overview at a faster pace. MMO are appealing given that you "progress" and the 1st few level will either get you or not a new soul. Course old time MMO player know what to expect but newer generation or new to the genre dont.
I think the good ole incremental method has proven effective. How the curve hit there after should not be too cruel either if you ask me.
I would actually love to see a new(?) approach on the leveling pace in the higher levels.
Lets say we take 4-8 hours for the first level and then keep increasing the required xp for a level up until maybe level 25, just like we are used to. But then at level 25 the xp does not increase anymore you got your constant number from there and go on until max level. This should not reduce the time required to hit max level, it should be just the same as with the ever increasing amount. It would give me personally a better understanding of where I´m at, and where I will be in 10 levels. Abandoning the ignorance of the feeling how long it will take me in 10 levels to get more experienced. Thus maybe introducing a new milestone at level 25.
The biggest thing that has turned me off from MMOs in the past when using the trial is having it take a long grind to level even before level 10. If it took almost 30 hours to reach level 8? No thank you. Interestingly it taking 30 hours to go from level 20-25 doesn't seem so bad.
Easing into it, as with many things in life, is often the best approach. I see it like a cool swimming pool, if you throw someone into it they will often come up with a gasp and a shiver before quickly swimming to the sides to exit the pool. If they are allowed to slowly wade into the water and acclimate, they are much more likely to stay in and have a good time swimming. In this case you want to slowly let them build up to the harshness of long levels and death penalties. Give them some early wins and character progression so they feel more accomplished, more involved in the world, and more likely to stay.
Aethor said:There must be a journey. Without a journey, the destination loses much of its purpose.
Imagine a game without the journey. Give everyone level 60 from the start and have them work at getting items and raiding. You might as well totally remove levels from such a game.
There would be no difference between anyone and anyone else. Nothing to remember.
Do you really want to play that?
The journey should take some significant time, otherwise it's almost as if there was no journey.
- Let the normal players take 6-9 months to 60.
- Hardcore players should be able to do it in half the time, but not less than half.
- Normal players should reach level 20 in maybe a month or month and a half.
- Level 2 should be reachable in a solid 4 to 6 hours of playing.
- The leveling curve should slow down as the levels go up.
- If you err, err on the side of requiring MORE time, not LESS.
Kaen said:Yes, exactly. The only thing I don't agree with is getting level 2 in 4 - 6 hours. I think levels 1-5 should take about 5-6 hours total, THEN levels should start slowing down quite a bit, but that's just my opinion. But I completely agree that leveling should be a huge part of the game like it was in EQ. It's ridiculous that most games now you can get max level in two or three weeks. When one of my friends tells me about a game and says, "Oh you can get max level in no time," I instantly know that it's a game I don't care about.
Spot on. I know some people are the "hardcore" and want a 3 hours to reach level 2 experience, but you want to kill a game quick, then thats how you kill a game quick.
Let the money (i.e. casual players) try it out for a few hours and find out they can only get to level 2. Every game forum in the world instantly becomes their sounding board for how bad this game is, or how it's exactly like they claimed it would be or other negitive "I told you so's" yada yada yada...
1-5 a bit quicker, let even the filthy casuals have fun, then slowly turn the water to boil and before you know it, you have tasty lobster.
Kittik said:Kaen said:Yes, exactly. The only thing I don't agree with is getting level 2 in 4 - 6 hours. I think levels 1-5 should take about 5-6 hours total, THEN levels should start slowing down quite a bit, but that's just my opinion. But I completely agree that leveling should be a huge part of the game like it was in EQ. It's ridiculous that most games now you can get max level in two or three weeks. When one of my friends tells me about a game and says, "Oh you can get max level in no time," I instantly know that it's a game I don't care about.
Spot on. I know some people are the "hardcore" and want a 3 hours to reach level 2 experience, but you want to kill a game quick, then thats how you kill a game quick.
Based on what info? I have a different opinion. What level i reach is irrelevant if I'm having fun. If I'm at level 1 and having fun at level 1 then im fine with being level 1. It's not about the number, its about the fun. I this would be how you would make a GREAT game.
Zorkon said:Based on what info? I have a different opinion. What level i reach is irrelevant if I'm having fun. If I'm at level 1 and having fun at level 1 then im fine with being level 1. It's not about the number, its about the fun. I this would be how you would make a GREAT game.
Most people play MMOs for persistent character progression. Level 1 for an extensive period of time is the antithesis of progress.
For me, there are many elements that affect how I perceive the speed of levelling which I am willing to undergo. Too fast and content becomes meaningless, too slow (with nothing new to do) and it becomes a grind. The sweet spot is difficult to get to, otherwise we wouldn’t be having this thread. For me, some of the areas I think are important to how I view levelling progression include:
• Content for the current level versus End Game
• Character Progression at Ding
• Maximum level
Content for the current level versus End Game
If there is a ton of content for the current level that is interesting and engaging that you can share with friends, then this is as important to me as getting to the next level and (typically) new abilities. If I don’t get bored by repeatedly doing the same content, then I would be willing to spend significant time at whatever level I am in. As soon as it feels like a grind, I will be looking to get out of the current content and if the only way is to level, then I will want to gain as much XP as possible as quickly as possible just to relieve the boredom.
If the main content is perceived to be at the end, then players are always going to want to get there as quickly as possible. If the content is as good at level one as it is at level 50, then, I for one, would love to explore more at lower levels.
VR to their credit have always said the game is about the journey.
Character Progression at Ding
If the next level offers something that my character cannot do (a new skill) that I really, really want, then I will also want to progress as quickly as possible through the current level. This obviously makes the current level insignificant compared to the new ability. If not handled carefully, then new promised abilities will cause me to do everything I can to get through the current level as quickly as possible, just so that I can have a more complete character.
However, if the rewards are based on the player having a good understanding of current skills and abilities, and offer something that will enhance that understanding, then it follows that learning how to use current abilities will be advantageous. Also, if that progression was also made throughout the level, then the Ding would become less important to character progression.
Maybe progression should be less about rewards at an arbitrary point in gaining XP and more about how you play and use the abilities you have. The more you use the ability, the greater your expertise, then at some point you gain an insight that allows you to tailor that ability in some manner, making it even more valuable. The point here is that the progression does not need to be tied to the Ding, but to how you play and throughout a level.
If a character gets better at each ding, then this encourages quick level progression. If progression gets better as you use the skills you have, this encourages gameplay.
Maximum Level
For me, this is a simple one, the higher the maximum level, the quicker I will want to get through those levels. If there are 100 levels to get through, then this becomes all-encompassing and more important than what I am doing to get there. Also, if there are too many levels then it will seem like an impossible task to get to the good stuff for newbies.
Summary
So, I am all for a levelling system that encourages people to explore the world and their characters, that doesn’t make the ding all important (from a character’s ability point of view) and offers meaningful character progression throughout the character’s current level. A ding should be about adventure content, character progression handled via game play.
If there is a ton of content for level 1, then spending 8+ hours at this level would be absolutely fine. If there was 4 hours of content and an average of 8 hours to ding, then this would be a problem for me, and I would want to get through the remaining xp as quickly as possible.
I would love to see a game where people are looking to slow XP gain down because the current level's content is so good. That would be my ideal game.
Liav said:Zorkon said:Based on what info? I have a different opinion. What level i reach is irrelevant if I'm having fun. If I'm at level 1 and having fun at level 1 then im fine with being level 1. It's not about the number, its about the fun. I this would be how you would make a GREAT game.
Most people play MMOs for persistent character progression. Level 1 for an extensive period of time is the antithesis of progress.
So again I ask, based on what info? Because Liav says so? One person cannot speak for "most people" without some form of data to back it up, or it's just opinion.
My opinion is "most people" looking to play Pantheon want content without levels over levels without content. Content is King, and there are many games out there now with levels of no or boring content.
3+ hours at level one, I would say is excessive if all youre going to be able to do is auto attack, kick or cast firebolt. How much level 1 content do you really want taking up the pantheon world, when it's going to be obsolete the fastest. I'm all for making MMO's hardcore, slowing it down and encouraging exploration more, but you atleast need your characters to progress a bit.
My only expectations of level 1 is to get a little taste of my suroundings, and I would like my fights to go 50/50 sometimes. and dying a few times as well.
for me i want lvl 1 - max to be an average of like 8 hours, for level 1 would obviously be less than 8 hours by quite a bit and the max level would be a lot more than 8 hours but all in all put together is averaged at about 8 hours so if there are 50 levels x 8= 400 hours of grinding, or exping, not saying in 400 hours you will be max levels becuase this isnt calculating traveling, tradeskilling, or any other distaraction you put your mind to instead of lvling, so this could easily get bumped up to 600 hours without trying. so if you play lets say 12 hours a day it could still take you almost 2 months to get to max level, if everything goes smoothly, which it probably won't due to needing gear to advance into harder areas, you i can see getting max lvl'd by my calculator taking almost 3 months, if played for long hours, if it is at a 8 hour average. but this would honestly be ideal for me due to if you see a high lvl character, you know he deserves it one way or another.
Durp said: I want people who see an even con able to beat it.... sometime and sometimes get their asses handed to them. Just like a level 6 warrior can be buffed to the max and kill level 7, 8 or even 9 mobs, why can't a level 6 mob not be buffed so a level 6 warrior gets whooped? That's pretty fair imo. Con system works. Even level. Might be hard, you might win, you might lose. You might lose from a blue con too. No reason this can't be done. :)
im fine with this at low levels, like 1-10 but after that i want people to be wary of their enviroment, maybe with the easy targets in the open world areas the devs said certain targets will be easier to deaft you could have a chnace to defeat, but anywhere where it is meant to be grp content i dont want to see a necro kiting anything with a big success rate, if it grp content keep it to be grp content but be grp content for a warrior but soloable for another class becuase of the utiltiy it has to offer them.
Zorkon said:So again I ask, based on what info? Because Liav says so? One person cannot speak for "most people" without some form of data to back it up, or it's just opinion.
My opinion is "most people" looking to play Pantheon want content without levels over levels without content. Content is King, and there are many games out there now with levels of no or boring content.
The entirety of EQ's content would have been cleared in a week from release if there were no levels gating progression.
Games that don't have leveling systems (EQNext) generally need to have extensive horizontal content to compensate. Pantheon's world would need to be many times larger than it will be at launch to accomodate enough horizontal content for players to not get bored without levels.
How much level 1 content did EQ have? Every starting city had some white con mobs for you to kill with a rusty shortsword to grind to level 3-4 before things like orc hill groups became viable. EQ's game world is actually pretty small, and it is honestly a game that was very light on content.
Unless you want Pantheon's development to take a decade and a couple hundred million dollars to complete, it is likely that content will be gated behind levels, and that those levels will come at a reasonable pace so that people aren't bored killing skeletons a trillion times to progress to level 2.
Durp said:Liav said:.....
If you have a specific goal in a game, there is an optimal path to do so. If you want to level as fast as possible, finding areas with higher mob density, faster respawns, and/or higher experience rates will have you achieving this goal more efficiently.
......
Here you go again with your "optimal path." You then say that to level as fast as possible, finding areas with higher mob density, faster respawns, and/or higher experience rates will have you achieving this goal more efficiently. I can come up with dozens of scenario's where this will not be the case at all.
You have claimed there is only one optimal path. Let's say you've found your optimal path and you gain a level from say 45 to 46 in 1 hour and no one else has ever done it faster. Is this then "The" optimal path? If someone else an hour later does it in 59 minutes and 59 seconds, is the method they employed then the new optimal path? There is no optimal path, just as there is no most efficient path. There are too many variables, game related, human related, other event related that prevent you from defining any such thing. What may work for you one day, may not work for you another.
edit: I can guarantee that you for every "optimal/efficient" path you can come up with in say EQ, there's someone who can tell you that their way is more "optimal/efficient"
Why can't both be true?
Liav, as a classX raceY with friends who compose a group makeup of Z, employs method 123 to achieve their most (discovered) efficiency.
Durp, as a classQ raceR with no friends whom he can reliably group with employs method 456 to achieve his most (discovered) efficiency. And then finds that when he levels from 30 to 40 the old method is altered due to his new available class skills, gear, and mob tactics. He must then discover his new most efficient process.
So you're right in saying there isnt a one "best" way. You're wrong in saying that a player or group shouldnt or cant find the "best" way that works for them. Or even for them in a given area or circumstance. This is precisely what seperates the "best" players from others. (And yes, "best" is in quotes because we all know that complete jackwagons can have the best gear and the fastest leveling due to things that don't reflect their skill or knowledge at all. But for simplicity in the conversation, I'll use the word anyway.)
@Sunstalkr
No in game chat? Do you mean no in game voice chat?
For the actual topic : I'm perfectly fine with level 1 taking a couple of hours, so long as I feel I'm doing something I feel is of value. As someone else recently said, I'd be perfectly fine with the level curve that existed in EQ, as long as I can see steady progress and have provable evidence that the getting a level actually makes a difference.
<3
1 minute ,no,10 months long
Who is right here ?who is wrong?
Lets just settle where we belong <3
So i'll praise other options, for a song
Let the songs be long, Let the songs be long!! Let the songs be long!!! <3 :) <3 :) <333