The leveling system should die

[Veta]

Herro guys 

 

Haven't posted in a while , I still lurk around but my work keeps me away and participating seems very tiring.

 

While playing video games, as one does, I came to the conclusion that leveling systems are not needed any more . When video games were a younger medium there was a need for levels to keep track of the players progression and so the game can reward them and/or punish them for choices .

It is my opinion that 'level up' is a thing of the past as games can now rely on their visual aspects to show the players choices and progress .

 

If you are thinking to yourself  "what is this guy talking about ,then how do you get skill points to put in your tree ? derp " that kind of progress is also flawed , too robotic, the player should be rewarded with special skills through game mechanics not because he collected enough EXP to level up

Oblivion was on to something (the more you ran the faster you could run, the more you jumped the faster you could jump, if you sneaked enough then you could roll (but then Skyrim came and reversed the progress unfortunately) ) .

 

What do you guys think , are you too attached to levels or could you part ways with them ?

 

P.S

(Also please forgive all the wrong punctuation marks , I not very smart )

 
                                                                                                            

[Guest]

Yes but you need some sort of progression or players will get quickly bored, if the skills after 1h and after 20h are the same. Plus you are supposed to actually grow in competence.

Replacing the leveling system by automatic perk aquisition just removes the rpg part of a game, it makes it an action game

[Guest enip]

Yes but you need some sort of progression or players will get quickly bored, if the skills after 1h and after 20h are the same. Plus you are supposed to actually grow in competence.

 

Replacing the leveling system by automatic perk acquisition just removes the rpg part of a game, it makes it an action game

 

aka Fallout 4. If anything, they should of ditched the perk system and made the player rely solely on skills and SPECIAL attribution. But what ever with that game.

[merryMalfunctioning]

I think Skyrim's skills and perks system is great. You improve by doing things, and perks let you specialize. No artificial class system imposed on it.

 

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the D&D style of RPG, with skills that you put points into and fixed classes. But Skyrim's system just seems so perfect for Tamriel amd TES in general.

 

Oblivion's system was an absolute NIGHTMARE. So much micromanaging your skills (by avoiding certain activities and mindlessly repeating others), because if you gained skills carelessly you would level up prematurely and find yourself fighting enemies you couldn't handle. Look at all the levelup managers for Oblivion, and the very precise analytical skill guides people made, all so that people could level up in a way that didn't destroy the game. Oblivion's skill system was the worst.

[Kamen Rider Kuuga]

Levels in more narrative driven games can go away, but in proper RPGs where numbers matter, no.

 

The day I give up leveling is the day I forsake JRPGs and other games that can be traced back to table top gaming. And that will be a dark day.

[Vaelorian]

I'm getting conflicting messages from your post...

 

"Leveling system needs to die" on the one hand, on the other "Oblivion, which had multiple leveling systems instead of one, is great".

I'm not sure if you've quite figured your own post contradicts itself to such an extent, but whatever.

 

Also, for the record no, leveling by gaining exp is not "flawed and robotic"; it's well defined.

People need to know HOW to progress, as well as WHEN they progress.

 

Oh, and by the way, Skyrim is one really easy-to-produce mod from using the exact same leveling system as Oblivion. Just mentioning it.

[SexDwarf2250]

Oblivion let you level up your jumping class specifically, and that was so much better? It's just a matter of taste and how much granularity you prefer. I would recommend the OP to join me in a game of Dwarf Fortress.

[Captain Cobra]

Cold, hard numbers are infinitely better at telling a player at how far they've progresses and how powerful they are than trying to do that via how the player looks.  Additionally, leveling up feels good, which is why leveling and experience systems have expanded beyond RPGs and into many other genres.

 

While I did like Oblivion's leveling system, it has a few major problems as pointed out by markdf.  Fortunately, these can fixed with a few simple tweaks:

• Allow the player to freely distribute their attribute points when leveling up, regardless of what skills the player leveled (I believe Daggerfall did something like this)
• Have the health gains from level ups retroactively increase as the player's endurance attribute increases.
• Have the Intelligence attribute work like the (now fixed) endurance attribute.

 

[afa]

...what kind of games have you been playing?

There are games out there that does not have level up system. There are also games out there that offers leveling as options rather advancement.

 

The amusing thing is that the leveling (or advancement) system is more prevailing now than ever as genre mature, spreading into games that traditionally does not offers such concepts.

 

I also mirror the sentiment that Oblivion and by extension Morrowind leveling systems have major flaws. Skyrim moving away from that is most welcoming, but it has its issues too of course.

 

Depending on the type of game the leveling system can integrate itself into character development and offers player or narrative options, an absolute statement of there should be no more leveling in a games sound restricting and backward.

Should there be games out there that does not have a leveling system, sure. Should there be experiments out there that attempt to strip leveling system from a genre that has and see what happens, sure let's dive in and see, but until then leveling in games in the recent years has been quite diverse and interesting, although sometimes overdone and occasionally nefarious.

[bjornk]

For games that rely upon simple rule sets (e.g. P&P, D&D, board games, card games, or video games that emulate any of these etc.) levels may stay, as they are a part of the rule system used. However, for a more simulation-like role-playing experience, it has to go. It's actually one of the many things that need to go. For instance, another thing that needs to go is HP (Health Points). Characters don't have HP or levels in real-life, they can't fight or use the skills they have as efficient when they are about to die. IMO an immersive role-playing game should try to emulate real-life in every possible way, that's what I expect from future RPGs anyway. To me there's no difference between playing Tetris for hours or grinding to level up your character for hours. You may enjoy one or the other more, but either way at some point you'll ask your self "WTF am I doing?". The "excitement" for the player in a role-playing game should come from the unpredictable nature of the game world where things constantly change without player's involvement, like aging characters, dynamic economy, war, natural disasters, famine etc. Not completely random, but occurring in a somewhat predictable way that makes sense. A simplistic simulation of real life is the way to go IMO. When you have a leveling system in a game, it would also need a careful "balancing", which is quite difficult to achieve and often breaks games. If your game relies on a real-life simulation however, there wouldn't be any need for artificial balancing, and players would know what to expect from the game.

[Dee383]

 

Yes but you need some sort of progression or players will get quickly bored, if the skills after 1h and after 20h are the same. Plus you are supposed to actually grow in competence.

 

Replacing the leveling system by automatic perk acquisition just removes the rpg part of a game, it makes it an action game

 

aka Fallout 4. If anything, they should of ditched the perk system and made the player rely solely on skills and SPECIAL attribution. But what ever with that game.

 

 

That Sounds Like The Leveling & Skill System That Work Perfectly Fine That We Had In FO3 & New Vegas ?

But Hey I Could Be Wrong !

[Guest enip]

 

 

Yes but you need some sort of progression or players will get quickly bored, if the skills after 1h and after 20h are the same. Plus you are supposed to actually grow in competence.

 

Replacing the leveling system by automatic perk acquisition just removes the rpg part of a game, it makes it an action game

 

aka Fallout 4. If anything, they should of ditched the perk system and made the player rely solely on skills and SPECIAL attribution. But what ever with that game.

 

 

That Sounds Like The Leveling & Skill System That Work Perfectly Fine That We Had In FO3 & New Vegas ?

But Hey I Could Be Wrong !

 

 

Partly wrong because it had perk system too. Except it wasn't solely based on the perk system like it is in Fallout 4.

 

[Veta]

Clearly some of you were more interested in making fun of the fact that I don't elaborate instead of trying to understand my point .

 

Numbers are the enemy , they must be in all games unfortunately but they must be hidden from the players eyes .

The progress should be shown not by the numbers, for in a game like Skyrim where the enemies level with you its pointless whether or not you are level 1 or 100,archmage or guild master the bantits will try to mug you , progress should be show by enemies running away when they realise the achievements of the players in the game world .

 

Skills should be gained as you use them, by reading scrolls books and training with teachers(kind of like Risen), not when you reach an arbitrary number of experience points to gen one skill point .

The numbers may have been a necessity in tabletops and in the early years but now the technology exists to advance things to a deeper level

 

 

[Veta]

I'm getting conflicting messages from your post...

 

"Leveling system needs to die" on the one hand, on the other "Oblivion, which had multiple leveling systems instead of one, is great".

I'm not sure if you've quite figured your own post contradicts itself to such an extent, but whatever.

I clearly wrote "Oblivion was on to something" and not that its system was great ,it was too flawed tbh but if one was to remove the ability to level up and leave only the skills developing as you use them the game would still be playable.

 

 

Also, for the record no, leveling by gaining exp is not "flawed and robotic"; it's well defined.

People need to know HOW to progress, as well as WHEN they progress.

 

Robots need defined parameters to know how to and when to progress humans don't.

 

 

 

Oh, and by the way, Skyrim is one really easy-to-produce mod from using the exact same leveling system as Oblivion. Just mentioning it.

You missed my point 'buddy' in skyrim regardless how much you use a skill 'one handed combat' for example you would swing your sword in the same speed and do the same damage you would just get exp which helped to level up to get points to put in you tree but you could use magic and level up and still put the skill point in 'one handed', while in oblivion if you jumped 100 times then you could jump higher ,

 

 

P.S

Im just trying to have a discussion there is no need be ironic by saying "whateeeeever" and "Just mentioning it."

because all you are doing is making me imagine you like a teenage girl.

[Guest]

Clearly some of you were more interested in making fun of the fact that I don't elaborate instead of trying to understand my point .

 

Numbers are the enemy , they must be in all games unfortunately but they must be hidden from the players eyes .

The progress should be shown not by the numbers, for in a game like Skyrim where the enemies level with you its pointless whether or not you are level 1 or 100,archmage or guild master the bantits will try to mug you , progress should be show by enemies running away when they realise the achievements of the players in the game world .

 

Skills should be gained as you use them, by reading scrolls books and training with teachers(kind of like Risen), not when you reach an arbitrary number of experience points to gen one skill point .

They numbers may have been a necessity in tabletops and in the early years but now the technology exists to advance things to a deeper level

 

I agree with this as much as I disagreed with your first post (that I did not understood the way you meant it it seems).

I'm using Requiem mod for Skyrim as it fixes most of this issues: non leveled world, hidden stats (so no min maxing), book needed for learning smithing, and so on.

Leveled world is IMO a cancer brought by badly designed open world, there should be beginer area, confirmed area, expert area... (like in The Witcher 3)

A common bandit resisting a deadric blade hit in the face makes no sense at all

[Guest]

(...)

To me there's no difference between playing Tetris for hours or grinding to level up your character for hours. You may enjoy one or the other more, but either way at some point you'll ask your self "WTF am I doing?".

(...)

I think that's the problem, you're not supposed to try to level up and grind levels, you're supposed to play the storyline and unexpectedly unlock perks/levels as your character grows in skills. (At least when the game is well designed)

 

 

(...)

The "excitement" for the player in a role-playing game should come from the unpredictable nature of the game world where things constantly change without player's involvement, like aging characters, dynamic economy, war, natural disasters, famine etc. Not completely random, but occurring in a somewhat predictable way that makes sense. A simplistic simulation of real life is the way to go IMO.

(...)

Sorry but I disagree completly, I would rather see devs spending time creating a good storyline, meaningful choices and interesting NPCs any day. (aka not unmodded skyrim because the main plot is clunky, being archmage is useless and Lidya is a wood stick).

 

 

(...)

When you have a leveling system in a game, it would also need a careful "balancing", which is quite difficult to achieve and often breaks games. If your game relies on a real-life simulation however, there wouldn't be any need for artificial balancing, and players would know what to expect from the game.

(...)

It's not the leveling system that requires balancing, it's the fact that the PC becomes more potent as the game progress.

Let's take a mage as example, you HAVE to balance the game around you learning spells! And if you don't learn spells and have the same ones after 30mins and after 20h then there is most likely a huge design problem

[Darkening Demise]

FO4 one of the worst leveling systems designed by far.

Skyrim wasn't that bad at least you leveled each category as you played while FO4 was soly perk based after you gain a level and get one point to get a new bonus.

Oblivion and Morrowind did things nicely but the problem was the going to find a nearest bed to level up and hoping you don't increase any skills along the way so you could level up again....like if you run around to find a bed your athletics will increase, get it higher it takes more time to level up, which will hurt your main leveling progression to increase base stats and for health, magika, and stamina.

FO3 and FONV had the same concept for each other. You use dialogue abilities, complete quests, kill, and discover locations. Upon gaining a level you increased your stats with a certain amount of points which would help you out such as higher chances of succession speech checks, damage done by guns and blades, etc. Then chose a perk per level, except NV made it a perk per two levels. You had a level cap though.

Each has their flaws but when it came to which game did things worst its FO4 hands down.

[Vaelorian]

 

I'm getting conflicting messages from your post...

 

"Leveling system needs to die" on the one hand, on the other "Oblivion, which had multiple leveling systems instead of one, is great".

I'm not sure if you've quite figured your own post contradicts itself to such an extent, but whatever.

I clearly wrote "Oblivion was on to something" and not that its system was great ,it was too flawed tbh but if one was to remove the ability to level up and leave only the skills developing as you use them the game would still be playable.

 

 

Also, for the record no, leveling by gaining exp is not "flawed and robotic"; it's well defined.

People need to know HOW to progress, as well as WHEN they progress.

 

Robots need defined parameters to know how to and when to progress humans don't.

 

 

 

Oh, and by the way, Skyrim is one really easy-to-produce mod from using the exact same leveling system as Oblivion. Just mentioning it.

You missed my point 'buddy' in skyrim regardless how much you use a skill 'one handed combat' for example you would swing your sword in the same speed and do the same damage you would just get exp which helped to level up to get points to put in you tree but you could use magic and level up and still put the skill point in 'one handed', while in oblivion if you jumped 100 times then you could jump higher ,

 

 

P.S

Im just trying to have a discussion there is no need be ironic by saying "whateeeeever" and "Just mentioning it."

because all you are doing is making me imagine you like a teenage girl.

 

 

Way to take personal insult from a post that had none.

 

I may have a different manner of writing than you, but that doesn't mean I was being "ironic". Perhaps you should actually try to comprehend what is being written instead of trying to feel offended and insulted by everything and everyone that's in your line of sight.

 

And to answer your supposed points: if it's obfuscation of information you're after, perhaps that's what you should outright say. "I want to know less about how to progress" is what you're attempting to state at the bottom line.

Well, most of us don't.

 

As for Skyrim: Yeah, I can still create a mod that increased your damage with one handed weapons based on it's level, and I can also increase your attack-speed at key milestone levels (for example, I don't know, what Oblivion had: 25,50,75,100) or at every level if you want to attack like the freaking Flash.

And It'd take me all of three minutes.

You completely underestimate the flexibility of the engine and are oblivious to how easy it is to mold it to your liking. So it's you that missed my point at the end of the day, while I very clearly understood yours.

 

If all you want is to not have the choice of where to put the point, I can also take that away. It'd take me slightly longer, but don't worry, I can do so.

 

So at the end of the day, yeah, just mentioning I have that ability. Now, let me take this one step further because last time you seem to have gotten insulted for no real reason.

The above means it can be done. That means you can either do it yourself, if you wish, or ask someone else to do it for you.

[afa]

Damage do get higher as you use one hand more in Skyrim, how much it goes up is adjustable with mods as well, perks also make it stronger too of course. Redundancy might or might not be good depending on what you are trying to accomplish.

Hiding information is a tricky thing, there are times where a number hidden from view is effective or good enough, but there are also times where it is frustrating. There exist companies/games that intentionally hide their numbers or what their numbers actually mean which lead all kind of reactions or receptions, some good some less so.

 

Another thing is the available manpower and information exchange in modern times; what it means to games that are intentionally being obscure, and what it means to games that poorly explain themselves.

[merryMalfunctioning]

I think numbers in an RPG make sense. They're a good proxy for the fact that you can never actually feel what your character feels. In real life, as you get stronger or learn things, you feel it. RPGs can never give you that.

 

Seeing a 1% increase in strength as a 1% increase in the size of your character's bicep (basically invisible) would be much less satisfying than seeing the number go up by 1. So I don't think the numbers will ever go away, although I would absolutely love to have the visual feedback as well.

 

It's not a preposterous idea... GTA San Andreas (the last GTA game I played) did a great job of that. But I don't think it's enough in an RPG.

[bjornk]

To create a revolutionary RPG, one should think outside of the boundaries of what they already know about RPGs. If you simply set out to make an RPG, you'll almost certainly end up with something similar to the existing ones, so instead, try to emulate real-life in every part of your game's mechanics. That of course takes much more complex systems and calculations. Most developers simply use the systems inherited from older games instead and they end up with things like enemies that take five bullets to their unarmored head and can still fight back as if those were just mosquito bites, or a four button dialogue system in an age of intelligent personal assistants, which is all rather disgraceful really.

 

(If all you want is an RPG with 30 year old gameplay mechanics, only with better graphics and sound please ignore the above paragraph).

[Veta]

 

Way to take personal insult from a post that had none.

 

I may have a different manner of writing than you, but that doesn't mean I was being "ironic". Perhaps you should actually try to comprehend what is being written instead of trying to feel offended and insulted by everything and everyone that's in your line of sight.

 

And to answer your supposed points: if it's obfuscation of information you're after, perhaps that's what you should outright say. "I want to know less about how to progress" is what you're attempting to state at the bottom line.

Well, most of us don't.

 

As for Skyrim: Yeah, I can still create a mod that increased your damage with one handed weapons based on it's level, and I can also increase your attack-speed at key milestone levels (for example, I don't know, what Oblivion had: 25,50,75,100) or at every level if you want to attack like the freaking Flash.

And It'd take me all of three minutes.

You completely underestimate the flexibility of the engine and are oblivious to how easy it is to mold it to your liking. So it's you that missed my point at the end of the day, while I very clearly understood yours.

 

If all you want is to not have the choice of where to put the point, I can also take that away. It'd take me slightly longer, but don't worry, I can do so.

 

So at the end of the day, yeah, just mentioning I have that ability. Now, let me take this one step further because last time you seem to have gotten insulted for no real reason.

The above means it can be done. That means you can either do it yourself, if you wish, or ask someone else to do it for you.

 

 

You are being passive aggressive you should stop it .

 

 

You are focusing too much on Skyrim and Oblivion so you clearly dont get my point .

Sure I can do basic stuff in the CK and change the numbers easy-peasy-lemon-squeezy  but I simply dont want to ,I neither work for bethshita not have I the time to bother on making tedious number changes .

I am talking about a game as detached form those two games as possible .

 

[merryMalfunctioning]

To create a revolutionary RPG, one should think outside of the boundaries of what they already know about RPGs. If you simply set out to make an RPG, you'll almost certainly end up with something similar to the existing ones, so instead, try to emulate real-life in every part of your game's mechanics. That of course takes much more complex systems and calculations. Most developers simply use the systems inherited from older games instead and they end up with things like enemies that take five bullets to their unarmored head and can still fight back as if those were just mosquito bites, or a four button dialogue system in an age of intelligent personal assistants, which is all rather disgraceful really.

 

(If all you want is an RPG with 30 year old gameplay mechanics, only with better graphics and sound please ignore the above paragraph).

 

"Revolutionary" is not synonymous with "good". Inheriting the strengths of past games is a good thing. If every game developer tried to revolutionize and go outside the boundaries, 95% of games would be nightmarishly bad. Most progress in the arts and in technology comes from evolutionary advances, not revolutionary advances.

 

Emulating real life is often a bad thing. We play games because real life is all jobs and housework and exercising and eating more fiber. In real life, one sword cut to forearm would permanently disable most of us. I cut my figure at work, only about 2mm deep, and I was out of action for a solid ten minutes dealing with the bleeding. Not fun. I don't want RPGs to be like real life. And if I could replace that bloody mess from work with a flashing message saying that I've lost 0.2hp, which will return at a rate of 0.1hp/min... yes, that would be much better than what actually happened which involved a lot of paper towels, bandaids, finger condoms, and trying to avoid contaminating any surfaces with my blood.

 

In real life, most dialog is boring and awkward and focused on meaning banal nonsense like the weather or traffic. Once again, I'll take the four button system if it means I can have professionally written dialogue that advances a compelling story. If you can create an intelligent personal assistant that can produce interesting, engaging dialogue, and you'll be able to make billions of dollars selling that technology. Literally BILLIONS.

[bjornk]

"Revolutionary" is not synonymous with "good". Inheriting the strengths of past games is a good thing. If every game developer tried to revolutionize and go outside the boundaries, 95% of games would be nightmarishly bad. Most progress in the arts and in technology comes from evolutionary advances, not revolutionary advances.

Whether something is good or not is always subjective. What you consider a "strength" in a past game, can very well be a weakness or even an annoyance to somebody else. A "revolutionary" RPG on the other hand, is one that was successful in changing how people look at the genre in a dramatic way. Almost no developer has ever attempted that, so "95% of games would be bad" is nothing but a fallacy. Also, there's been almost no "progress" in RPG gameplay mechanics for the last 30 years.

 

Emulating real life is often a bad thing. We play games because real life is all jobs and housework and exercising and eating more fiber. In real life, one sword cut to forearm would permanently disable most of us. I cut my figure at work, only about 2mm deep, and I was out of action for a solid ten minutes dealing with the bleeding. Not fun. I don't want RPGs to be like real life. And if I could replace that bloody mess from work with a flashing message saying that I've lost 0.2hp, which will return at a rate of 0.1hp/min... yes, that would be much better than what actually happened which involved a lot of paper towels, bandaids, finger condoms, and trying to avoid contaminating any surfaces with my blood.

 

You may think that emulating real life is a "bad" thing, while others may think completely the opposite. They may think that realism makes their games more engaging, more immersive. There are many popular survival games or mods that introduce all sorts of real life aspects into games, which suggests there's indeed an interest for this sort of thing.

 

In real life, most dialog is boring and awkward and focused on meaning banal nonsense like the weather or traffic. Once again, I'll take the four button system if it means I can have professionally written dialogue that advances a compelling story. If you can create an intelligent personal assistant that can produce interesting, engaging dialogue, and you'll be able to make billions of dollars selling that technology. Literally BILLIONS.

Again, it's a matter of preference. I'd like in game dialogues to be life-like. Instead of a handful of choices you're presented with, I prefer a free form dialogue system that will allow me to ask about anything that an NPC may or may not know about, precisely in the way that I want to say it. Just like in real life. The technology needed for this is already out there.

[merryMalfunctioning]

 

Whether something is good or not is always subjective. What you consider a "strength" in a past game, can very well be a weakness or even an annoyance to somebody else. A "revolutionary" RPG on the other hand, is one that was successful in changing how people look at the genre in a dramatic way. Almost no developer has ever attempted that, so "95% of games would be bad" is nothing but a fallacy. Also, there's been almost no "progress" in RPG gameplay mechanics for the last 30 years.

 

The problem with saying that "good" is subjective is that it derails any real discussion. I think there is enough overlap in peoples definitions of "good" that it is quite possible to discuss whether certain features are "good".

 

Lots of developers do attempt to make radically different games, if you get away from the big publishers and look at indie games. And a lot of those games are not very good. For every gem there are a handful of games so bad that people would probably pay to NOT play them.

 

 

 

You may think that emulating real life is a "bad" thing, while others may think completely the opposite. They may think that realism makes their games more engaging, more immersive. There are many popular survival games or mods that introduce all sorts of real life aspects into games, which suggests there's indeed an interest for this sort of thing.

 

I enjoy some realism, and I get that some people may desire even more realism than I do. But ruthlessly pursuing maximum realism does not lead to fun games. Realism also has to be tempered by the need for gameplay to be compelling. That's why Frostfall doesn't automatically kill you if you fall in the ocean in Winterhold. It's not like Chesko has some computational barrier keeping him from maximizing the realism. Papyrus could easily handle a set of simple calculations describing core body temperature and temperature in the extremities. But why? What's more important is taking the underlying concept, abstracting it (into numbers and character attributes and dice rolls), and making it something fun.

 

 

 

Again, it's a matter of preference. I'd like in game dialogues to be life-like. Instead of a handful of choices you're presented with, I prefer a free form dialogue system that will allow me to ask about anything that an NPC may or may not know about, precisely in the way that I want to say it. Just like in real life. The technology needed for this is already out there.

 

I strongly disagree with your claim that the technology is already out there. There's a reason hardly anyone uses the voice recognition on their phone unless they are driving, and even then it tends to involve a lot of shouting and repetition. On a PC, you could type your dialog and the game could feed it to a natural language keyword lookup system, but how is that really any different than the dialogue system from Morrowind? The illusion of real dialogue would fall apart within five minutes of starting the game.