|
In my previous post, I discussed the history and design goals of levels. This time around, I'll take a look at the pros and cons of using levels in an online RPG.
Pros
To some extent, levels work in online games, so they aren't all bad. But, let's take a look at some of the areas where levels shine.
Familiar - Even for players who haven't encountered levels before, it's easy to understand the concept: a level 10 character is more powerful than a level 5 character, in general. If your character goes from level 5 to level 6, that's good! Bigger numbers are better! This concept doesn't require much explanation to new players.
Simple - The big win is that levels are easier to implement than many alternatives. They're much easier to implement and balance than a system that doesn't have levels. Having a single number at the core of many calculations makes it much easier to create game mechanics that work as a whole.
Popular - Many online games have levels at the core of the gameplay, so the issues they can bring are well understood. The design transfers to many different settings. Most players already understand the concept and understand what they have to do. With so many people using levels, too, you have a lot of people working on how to improve the system and work around design problems.
Cons
However, levels have a number of problems that people regularly point out. Some of these problems have solutions which I will talk about later.
Oversimplification - One problem is that a level-based system can simplify things too much. In some older games the long, hard journey between levels meant that you didn't get many upgrades. You also tend to be restricted in what you can do with your character based on level; no Priest in WoW can possibly get Shadowform before 40th level, for example.
Levels can also trivialize advancement. At level X I cast a fireball at a monster. At level Y, my fireball costs 30% more power (from a pool 30% larger) and does 30% more damage to a monster that has 30% more hit points. What have I gained other than seeing bigger numbers?
Segregation - No matter how hard you try, a high level character and a low level character are limited in how they can interact. A new character isn't going on a raid, for example. A high level character killing things in a low level area just seems like an jerk, not someone really playing the game.
As an example, you have a max level character that you play with your guild and other friends. Your significant other decides that he/she wants to play the game, too. Your options are limited if there isn't a sidekicking or mentoring system in the game. Do you roll another low-level character? Do you try to powerlevel your significant other with your main character? Do you just ignore your significant other and then risk a breakup or divorce?
C*ckblocking - You start playing in a game world and decide you want to see a dragon! Sorry, kids, you have to be this high (Nth level) before you can go see a dragon. What about doing some crafting? Sorry, you have to be M levels in order to get that crafting ability. Go on a raid with friends? Start a guild? Travel to another zone? Sorry, all these require you to have a specific level on one game or another. Even if the game doesn't explicitly have levels in it, some players may still judge based on levels; which guild would most people rather join: one where the guild leader is max level, or one where the guild leader is still very low?
Inappropriate - Sometimes a system of levels is just inappropriate for the game or setting. What is a level 15 Scientist, for example? Is that before or after studying for a PhD? Why does my character need to attain level 30 before learning to use staff weapons in a science fiction game? Why is an "Angry Bear" in one area level 11, while a "Wandering Bear" that looks identical to the first one is level 25 in another area? Levels don't always fit into a game, even the types of games for which levels were originally designed.
Some Solutions
Before I advocate ripping out levels completely from a game, let's look at some of the possible solutions that existing games have done to mitigate some of the problems.
Alternate Advancement - This was developed in EverQuest as one solution to the continual increase in the level cap. By gaining points from doing something beyond just murdering monsters, you can gain additional powers. In some ways, however, this is just another type of level.
Sidekicking or Mentoring - This allows one player to temporarily adjust their level to that of another player. City of Heroes allowed the lower level player to gain levels, while EverQuest 2 allowed the higher level player to drop down to the lower level player's level. This allowed people to focus on a single character yet still play with different groups of friends. The downside here is that a character with an adjusted level doesn't necessarily have "level appropriate" abilities. If space is limited, would you rather have a new player that just got jumped up several levels, or someone of the appropriate level that has all the powers for that type of character?
Talent and Skill Trees - This helps a player customize a character by selecting specific abilities based on points accumulated over time. This is a similar concept to Alternate Advancement, but it is usually more closely tied to the main level. The problem, especially with a "tree" type structure, is that the character is still limited by level. At lower levels, the choices often seem slim and nearly meaningless; the real power is usually at the higher levels where flexibility is important.
Eliminating Experience Points - EVE Online has done this to some extent. Instead of going out and killing things for points to level up, you gain skills over time, even when offline. This means that you don't have to mindlessly grind levels to get more powers. But, this still enforces a "time = power" paradigm that levels often enforce.
In a future post, we'll get the payoff: I'll present some of my own ideas for how to replace levels in a game.
(This post originally appeared at http://www.psychochild.org/?p=600)
|
Levels serve many purposes, and I think you might have missed two things they do for game developers: extend game length and force player experiences. Levels are a convenient way of spacing out the experiences of a ply, which results in a longer game. Players will want to reach the end game content, but will be forced to go through levels of other game content they might otherwise avoid but still enjoy.
This should be said though: some games make beginning and middle game worthwhile, so the gaming experience is fun from beginning to end. Other games do not, and instead focus purely on developing engaging end game content, which leaves low and mid level players in the dark. When designing a game system based around levels, a game designer should keep all parts of the leveling experience unique and engaging; the player should be pleased throughout your ENTIRE game, not just the end result of a couple months of tedious play.
Guild Wars does not restrict access to areas once you get past the initial, "pre-Searing" tutorial section (although there are players who make characters specifically for pre-Searing, so the area turned out to be an interesting design decision for ArenaNet, I think). Of course, if you go into an area with very tough opponents and you are low level, you'll almost certainly die. Then again, that's pretty much how real life is, too. Players exploit the structure of the system, but that's a decision that is up to the player, not the designer, and that's where the decision should be (with the player, not the designer). The only problem GW has is that ArenaNet has stated that they always intended the game to be playable as a solo/single player experience, duo/two player experience, or as a group, but they actually failed to design it properly in the latter part (Ascension Missions are pretty much the limit without human groups or without exploiting Heros rather than Henchmen by buying at least one of the other campaigns). Still, I'd say that it had the right idea, at least as far as keeping levels but not arbitarily forcing designer decisions onto players. GW also maintains interesting content regardless of level, so that's another area of success for the franchise.
I'd like to offer my input on the idea of the Fireball spell not really changing anything as a character progresses. The problem in the example given is that everything has been leveled dynamically, including enemy abilities. This is very much the wrong way to go about dynamic leveling in a game. Bethesda made the same horrid mistake in Oblivion. It's ludicrous to have enemy abilities advance with the character's level. By "abilities", I do not mean just health or damage. In fact, I could see that being okay. However, it's silly to have an enemy of the same type/species actually change their skills along with a character as the character advances. For example, a troll facing a character who has a speed of 40 should not have a faster speed to compensate for a character who has developed to the point where the character's speed is 80. Doing this type of thing only removes player agency and makes the entire process of advancement pointless in the extreme. "Oh, but we want to maintain challenge!" is a common reply. Well, gaming is not about challenge; it's about having fun. For some people, that may mean playing a challenging game, but many people do not share that preference. Players who want challenge can make choices to create challenge (for example, don't develop your speed and try to face the troll who is faster than you are). The agency of choosing must stay with the player, not the designer, but I see this fact being lost in many modern products.
Mainting challange comes in the form of new enemies of higher levels in more dangerous areas of the game and doesn't take away the fun. In fact it's a good way to stimulate exploration of the world.
Another pro is the fact that, as a designer, you have more controle over players. The level system sends players out into the world so new players will have the opportunity to experience the game in full without having to spawn camp enemies because higher level players are killing them all off. The higher levels move on because there's nothing left for them to experience in certain areas, thus making room for new players.
It is a shame though that players with significant level differences don't have as much options to interact with each other as players of the same level. But hey, this does reflect the real world. Nobody's ever sat down at the gym expecting to become a body builder in one day. It is a commitment players will have to make. If they've seen the game at a friends' place or done some reading on the game they should know what they're getting themselves into. Sure, players often have false expectations when it comes to playing with "that-high-level-friend and they're often let down. But in the end they're more let down by other players rather then the game itself. And even if they're "let down" by their friends, a good game provides the same kind of social interaction on each level range, stimulate grouping up, making new friends, etc.