I think a tutorial is actually very important, I just think it should be something separate from the in-game world. Maybe something you can connect to from character select.
Even EQ had a tutorial. It was a separate program in the EQ directory.
Dullahan said:I think a tutorial is actually very important, I just think it should be something separate from the in-game world. Maybe something you can connect to from character select.
Even EQ had a tutorial. It was a separate program in the EQ directory.
Exactly. I find it strange that so many people forget that EQ had a tutorial. I certainly don't see a problem with a tutorial being included in Pantheon. I'd just like the tutorial to be a single player "mini game" that you played before you went on the live servers. It only needs to be a really small tutorial that just explains the basics of the interface etc for new players and people who already know how to play can just skip it.
Cromulent said:Dullahan said:I think a tutorial is actually very important, I just think it should be something separate from the in-game world. Maybe something you can connect to from character select.
Even EQ had a tutorial. It was a separate program in the EQ directory.
Exactly. I find it strange that so many people forget that EQ had a tutorial. I certainly don't see a problem with a tutorial being included in Pantheon. I'd just like the tutorial to be a single player "mini game" that you played before you went on the live servers. It only needs to be a really small tutorial that just explains the basics of the interface etc for new players and people who already know how to play can just skip it.
God bless that tutorial. In the age of dial-up modems and clunky computers, when I couldn't get EQ working I'd sit at my desk with the EQ Player's Guide open, reading about stats and lore and running around the tutorial, pretending I was playing. Good times.
This is a great thread! It forced me to think on the best leveling experience I have had verses the worst. It came down to LotrO and EQ then WoW. The time issue comes down to the experience I had. Everyone will be different and unfortunately we all can’t have the game that fits us perfectly. I think LotrO had the same time mechanics everyone else had but it had a fantastic story behind it. I found myself running all over the place trying to see or be a part of the quest chain. It was fun. It took me forever to level. I honestly did not care.
EQ was different due to the game had long leveling paths and I knew it would take forever. The game had so much to do and explore it kept you busy. It was my first MMO and it was just exciting to get online and run around and have a good time. It was not so much the worst it was a long envestment. Way to many games do not have the level of depth to go on so you have people racing to top. Were is the fire?
WoW was broken after release. Once BC hit the rush to end content had started. I am not sure what drove it but I know it created major player gaps and population issues in cities and on serves. Leveling was consistent in the early years. Post BC it turned into the 10 level grind in content that had little or no meaning. The WoW train went off the rails.
In my opinion if you have a good story and quest chain not like GW2 did but deep and branching I think people will just follow it and not care about the leveling time between level 35 and 36. If you are progressing even if it is slow it needs be engaging and fun. Keeping my answers simple here due to I think the answer is that simple. Make the game enganing with content and lots of it and it wont matter.
Ox
Oxillion said:WoW was broken after release. Once BC hit the rush to end content had started. I am not sure what drove it but I know it created major player gaps and population issues in cities and on serves. Leveling was consistent in the early years. Post BC it turned into the 10 level grind in content that had little or no meaning. The WoW train went off the rails.
Ox
Hey Ox!
So the problem with WoW was that when BC hit all 1-60 content was worthless now. They made it so that 61-70 was they part of the game worth playing, which limited the size of the game and made all lower level content pointless so people just wanted to rush through it. Its sad really, because if you ask anyone who Played WoW from 2004 on they will all say same. Early WoW was the best, and then it got a little worst with each Xpac. Also Flying mounts were introduced in TBC which made it even worse as a player leveling. Now you were 100% not going to see anyone at max level due to they were flying overhead. This meant players often found themselves leveling solo without seeing nearly anyone at all in the game. That is my take on why it went all wrong with WoW.
I am with the gamers who said: Level needs to be a journy. If you get max lvl in few days, you can skip all the levels from start. It is nothing meaningful to level up as to learn skill and how to use them. In this case skip lvls and just let them learn skills and let skills get the xp by using them :D
The tried and true increasing time curve per level is the best here. The first 7ish levels should move fairly quickly to let the players gain a handful of abilities/spells and introduce them to various mechanics, then it should slow down so that at 8 or so you should notice grouping become more or less mandatory to level with any kind of real efficiency. From there to 20 is still reasonable in speed but from 20-50 is a long hard journey.
Level 1 shouldn't take too long, nor should level 2, but after that, they should exponitially get long and longer in between dings.
The first few levels are boring when all you have is "Slash" or "Fire Bolt" and thats all you get to cast for 4 or 5 hours. No thanks. I agree, it should be a journey, but it shouldn't be a boring journey.
Here is my break down:
Levels 1-10 should take 1-2 hours per level on Avg. (Avg. time it takes to reach lvl 10 = 15 hours gameplay)
Levels 10-20 should take 2-4 hours per level on Avg. (Avg. time it takes to reach lvl 20 = 30 hours gameplay)
Levels 20-30 should take 3-5 hours per level on Avg. (Avg. time it takes to reach lvl 30 = 40 hours gameplay)
Levels 30-40 should take 5-7 hours per level on Avg. (Avg. time it takes to reach lvl 40 = 60 hours gameplay)
Levels 40-50 should take 7-10 hours per level on Avg. (Avg. time it takes to reach lvl 50 = 85 hours gameplay)
Total = Avg. 225 Hours of play time before hitting max level. (This is assuming the players are just focusing on leveling, and not doing other stuff as well.)
Edit: This Avg would be one I would like to see even 3 years after Release. Meaning the most hardcore levelers in the game on their X progeny would still have to put in 110+ hours to reach max level. Also this would mean most new players would take double the time shown here to reach max for the first time when learning the game. I wouldn't mind as a casual gamer if it takes me 2-4 months to level from 1-50 and thats being on 3-4 hours a night.
Edit 2: For those enjoying the game as they go and not focused on just leveling I would like the Avg. to be somewhere around 400 hours game time to Level 1-50.
I agree with many here. Old School EQ1 had a good level of progression. It should start off relatively fast but not the instant leveling of completing a tutorial and you're level 5 that you sometimes see today and by the time you are in your 40s, it is hell to get the next Ding!
I agree that I'm ok with long levels as long as there is stuff to do so I don't get bored. I think that anything devs spend time working on should be enjoyed for a decent amount of time before moving on, so if you level too fast and rush through an area, what was the point in spending months working on the area? Just don't make huge "empty" areas to make the world feel bigger; give us something to do in those areas. :)
Eight hours may be a bit long for level 1, but I wouldn't mind a couple of hours. Especially if there are other ways to progress with your character, such as crafting and skill gains. These may not be the same as larger level gains, but they give the feel that you are progressing continuously as you go.
There will always be people trying to level as fast as possible; I've played both styles as I like to gain levels. But, my first experience in EQ was in the Highlited Truce merchant/tradeskill guild on Terris-Thule that provided pelts and silks to players looking for tradeskill resources. It was a newbie guild and you had to leave once you hit level 20. I spent 6 months running around in Everfrost collecting HQ bear pelts and spiderling silk to trade to players and had a blast. Had over 10k platinum before I was level 20.
I'm sure the leveling pace will work itself out and no matter what, I plan to just have fun!
I won't break down the leveling experience in a timeframe ,like how you'd force a book on a tight shelf.
One reason is because good adventures are timeless.The outcome of adventures are uncertain.
Therefore the time it should take for us to progress should be uncertain
If we focus on how long levels should take,we do not allow ourselves to enjoy an adventure.
Trying to controle things and planning everything is not how adventures work.
In order to truly enjoy an adventure ,we have to accept risk & the uncertain nature of adventures.
Accepting that ,no,we can't map the whole experience in advance.
Rites of passage are in my opinion a way better alternative to levels,because you have to prove yourself in the world itself in order to advance.
So rites of passage actually make content king as is the goal.
And what is in a number really? It should take 2 weeks,no 5 months. I am level 120 or 432.Nothing special about them numbers.
But with rites of passage I believe advancing will be a joy.It will feel amazing when you are tested and pass that test.
Levels are like looking from the other side of the room at the series of books you've collected, catching dust.
RItes of passage are like reading the books and living the tales.
So I wouldn't even be sad at all to see levels go,as I mentioned a few months ago.
How long should level one take?
Let me start by saying that I have always been an (dreaded word incoming) end game player and not cared much about the journey as long as I got to the raid content asap and hopefully a server first with it.
I wont speak on level one but in my opinion I wouldnt care if it took a year to get to max level. I know this wont be the case but for me the longer it takes the better.... as long as I dont have to grind kite the same 4 dinos in Timorous Deep from level 50 to 60. :)
That is one of the things that attracted me here... the promise of an exciting, diverse journey and not so much the promise of a phemonimal end game.
I like the idea of a tutorial that once complete advances you to level 2 and sets you on your way.
At the very least, providing familiarity with controls and various game systems. 15-30 minutes is probably a reasonable amount of time to expect the average person to complete this.
Nah, for a tutorial, make it so you start at level 0 and after you finish the tutorial and are familiar enough to start actually playing, you've advanced to level 1 as your starting point. If you skip the tutorial, you are already at the starting point and begin at level 1.
I've noticed in games where levels came on quicker, I ran through content instead of being forced to enjoy it. EQ 1 took quite a while to level, forcing me to really explore the content and different zones, camps. I think I spent several weeks in Greater Faydark, even had someone guide me to the Commonlands and continue my progression there. If I quickly leveled to 15, I doubt I'd really create as many memories of those starting zones as I had.
Many other games have never left me with that impact. If leveling will take that long, there has to be enough content to keep a person enteretained, otherwise the sense of grind may get to some people and turn them away.
Levels often imply that content is not equally fine to progress your character ,levels imply that there is a "good" and "bad" area to progress in.
And therefore players start to focus on which zone will help them to advance the fastest
The adventure itself is ruined then.Because a level system linked to zones tries to set up a "right" path for you.It tries to controle you.
On adventures there is no right or wrong path as the outcome of your choices always is uncertain.The uncertain nature is what makes an adventure
Adventures make content king,but levels make destination(endgame) king ,instead of the journey.
So that is why I think they'll have to make a choice here;adventure where content is king or a level system where endgame(or best area to get goodies and advance) is king
Tutorial - good. Instanced for just the person using it so there is no rush or pressure. With an option to bypass it - perhaps available only after one character on the account has gone through it. Perhaps focusing on group basics not just movement and interface e.g. tank role in a group is to hold the mob and survive, healer role is keep other characters in the group alive, DPS role is to kill the mob. Very basic and quick.
Level 1 taking a while - good. Begin as you plan to continue, don't get new players used to three levels for scratching their butts the right way (two if they miss the itch totally and one level if they cut themselves and start to bleed).
Level 1 or other very low levels emphasizing group play - awful. No no no no. Despite that "begin as you plan to continue". (1) Most people will be more comfortable for their first few hours being able to do things on their own. A new game can be overwhelming at first (many of us have played so many we forget this because it isn't true for us). (2) The more starting areas there are and the more days/weeks/months have gone by after release the less people there may be in any particular starting area and some of those people won't want to group. A new player considering whether to keep the game won't last long if early content *requires* groups but groups aren't there to be quickly had.
Forced grouping (as distinct from encouraged grouping or much more highly rewarded grouping) is bad at any level - an opinion which many others here do not share but that is off-topic. But perhaps most of us can agree that forced grouping will hurt the game at the lower levels. Let people learn the interface, enjoy the environment, see how the harvesting and crafting systems work, talk in chat or at least listen, consider joining guilds, make friends etc without needing to find 3-5 other folks in the same area at the same time before they can get to level 2.
Angrykiz said:Still hoping level 1 takes long enough to make people want to group up and not have the first 10 levels be a solo thing then all of a sudden it's a group game.
Kiz~
What fun would grouping be when no one has any abilities with which to do anything? A healer archtype of no healer, a CC archtype of no CC abilities? A group of all level 1's would be just a bunch of kick, slash or fireballs.