The Dilemma of Level vs. Skill In MMOs 463
Karen Hertzberg writes "Since MMORPGs became a mainstream medium, players have debated the two primary methods of advancement. Which is better? Is it the level-based system that is so dominant in today's MMORPGs, or the lesser-used skill-based system? This has been a strong subject of debate on many forums, blogs, and gaming sites for as long as the genre has existed. Ten Ton Hammer's Cody 'Micajah' Bye investigates the two concepts and gathers input from some of the brightest minds in the gaming industry about their thoughts on the two systems of advancement."
Relatedly, I've seen a growing trend of players saying that such games don't really take much skill at all. The standard argument is that it just boils down to "knowing how to move" or "knowing when to hit your buttons." In the MMO community, people often make references to FPS or RTS games, saying they have a higher skill cap. However, the same complaints also come from within those communities, with comments like "you just need to know the map," or "it's all about a good build order." At what point does intimate knowledge of a game's mechanics make a player skilled?
Editor didn't read the article (Score:5, Informative)
"To ensure that we're being absolutely crystal clear, this article isn't focused on the discussion concerning the differences between the pure RPG leveling system versus "player skill-based" games. That's a completely different conversation altogether, and - unfortunately - some of our paneled public and developers thought that was where the discussion was leading, and thus some answers from particular teams won't be printable...at least in this article."
comments about the additional editor added summary (Score:4, Informative)
Dear idiot Slashdot editor (Score:5, Informative)
The article is talking about skill-based character progression systems in RPGs (e.g., Elder Scrolls), not player skill in the general sense. There's a goddamn paragraph on the first page that clarifies this, but apparently that wasn't enough.
Re:usage based (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, that's why anything that can be scripted, etc. should not be rewarded.
Now I can't say how exactly such a system would look like (if I could, I'd try to sell it to someone). It's a bit like obscenity: Can't define it, but I know it when I see it.
As humans, we usually know skill from level. Someone who can shoot straight will be more successful in an FPS than someone who can't. So rewarding hitting more than shooting rewards skill. That's the basic idea.
The end all solution!! (Score:3, Informative)
If you like to see how a "system of play time vs skill" is done properly, look at Battlefield : Heroes.
No - I don't particularly care for the game, but when it starts up it matches you up against people of similar level and skill so you aren't getting pummeled by a level 20, and you are a lowly level 3 or 4.
Mod parent up (Score:3, Informative)
I really think Guild Wars is the only MMO where something like skill, as opposed to bunny hopping, loot gathering, and spending 3 weeks of your life getting a character up to 80, only to discover the class categorically sucks at PvP. I also think the class definitions are more complex than the traditional tank/healer/dps.
I also really really love the multiclass aspect which yields a much larger amount of viable and interesting builds, combined with the free skill rebalancing, makes tweaking your character/skill setup part of the game. Unlike other MMOs where you essentially go to a website and download the build for your class based on the most recent patch.
Re:EVE Online's approach (Score:3, Informative)
Summary is kinda misleading, actually (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, I think the problem is that the summary makes a hash of it. The "advancement through skill" from the quoted part, is not the same meaning of "skill" that the following submitter rant uses.
The "skill" in the "skill-based vs level-based MMO" debate, is not about the [b]player's[/b] skills, but about the [b]character's[/b] skills. _Major_ difference.
A "skill-based MMO" (or MUD) does _not_ mean you have to learn to circle-strafe or be a cyber-athlete or anything. They can be just as mindless affairs as WoW. (And I'm actually not saying that as a bad thing: I actually like WoW.) They just mean it has no levels, but they have a bunch of skill numbers and you spend your xp directly on the skills and stats.
Heck, you could even make a turn-based skill-based games if you wanted to, and in fact some have actually been made.
A good example of a skill-based system is Vampire: Bloodlines. It doesn't have levels at all. You get some xp and you spend it directly on raising your strenght, or your dexterity, or your melee skill, or your lockpicking skill. Having more experience doesn't automatically make you tougher at some point. You could buy only social abilities for a long while for example, and be an elder vampire that can't fight worth Jack, but could probably convince the Pope and Arafat to get married to each other. Or instead you could be the toughest kung-fu master but unable to talk even your best friend into seeing things your way. Or learn a lot of spells right from the start. Or anything in between.
A good example of a level-based game are most old D&D games. You inherently have a to-hit modifier or access to spells based on your level. Inherently being higher level makes you better.
And Fallout 3 is actually a hybrid rather than just level-based. At its heart, what matters are your character skills, not your level. The level just gives you points to put in your skills.
Or if you want an example based on WoW, imagine a game that plays exactly like WoW, but has no levels. Instead of your sword skill automatically raising its cap by 5 points each time you level up, you don't level up, but spend xp to buy more sword skill. Or instead of getting a new spell every 2 levels, you have no levels, but buy spells with xp. You don't get +1 this stat, and +2 that stat, etc, when you level up, you buy stat increases with xp.
That would also mean that all restrictions on equipment have to be skill based instead of level based. In a skill-based game you don't have some sword that requires minimum level 39, you have a sword that requires, say, minimum 195 sword skill. If you want to use it, you dump your xp into sword skill. If you want to be a mage, you dump your xp into spell skills instead and don't get to use that sword too soon.
That's really what a skill-based MMO would look like.
But other than that, the game would still play exactly like WoW. You wouldn't need any more player skill to go do the Lakeshire quests in that setup, than you need in the real level-based WoW.
Re:and baking is just knowing the recipe (Score:5, Informative)
" Except, get this, wait for it...., you don't die at 100%. In fact there's no set limit you die at. The game just decides it's your time to die. Sometimes their damage is at 150% or higher"
The problem is you haven't played smash brothers, smash brothers is in fact a skill based game. The more damage you take the easier it is to ring you out, the idea is to take the least damage as possible because the more damage you take using special moves at higher damage percentages will ring you out instantly for a win.
You just have to learn which moves will ring out and smash people out of the screen at high percentages.
The damage system is actually innovative in that you *do* increase your risk of dying by people who actually attempted to understand the game.
Ironically your complaint that your son didn't try to figure it out himself, when you didn't try to figure out smash brothers system is itself a bit humorous. :)
Re:EVE Online's approach (Score:2, Informative)
But in Eve, rarely is any PVP done solo anymore. When your in a gang, a newb can still tackle and hold a target down for the more experienced players to kill. Unlike traditional level based MMOs where 5 day old newbs are about as effective as a ant against a 5 year old player, in eve the 5 day old newb can make a difference. One of the earlier Titan (largest ship in game) losses was due to a 2 month old newb being able to decloak him.
Re:EVE Online's approach (Score:2, Informative)
And thus was created the most boring game to play. Having to wait real time in order to gain skills is not very fun, however it makes for a great business model.
I mean the concept of skill is that a better skilled player will win. Applied to eve it means whomever created their character earlier has a greater chance to win unless completely outnumbered. So it's not a whole lot of skill involved. The specialization is great until you realize that a core set of skills are needed to fly ships, which in a space ship combat game should be everyone's main focus. The life of a eve scientist who flies from station to station in shuttles queuing up research projects is pretty lame. So is waiting a month to level up a skill to get 5% more damage.
Re:EVE Online's approach (Score:3, Informative)
Eve is a tactical and situational game. If you suck at tactics (as in managing your RL squad mates) you die, no matter how good your ship is. If you have some leadership and tactical skills as a person, you'll win fights, even if it's only by using sheer numbers. Better in game skills mean you do more damage and take less. I can beat a noob in a battleship with an assault frigate, because I do a crapload of damage and he can't even run his shields right or hit me.
Sounds about right to me... A decent analogy is that a US Naval cruiser captain could easily sink a aircraft carrier (1vs1) if the carrier captain didn't know how to run his ship and didn't have the knowledge to give his men orders. If the carrier doesn't get planes in the air, it's a big giant defenseless target. If the carrier captain knew what he was doing, he'd have the cruiser sunk before the cruiser could fire on him.
Thats why you don't fly battleships unless you can _fly_ battleships. Just being able to pilot the hull around is easy, but it doesn't mean you'll win fights. You need the skills to use the thing.
Meh it's a boring game anyway. Even when it's "fun" it's only fun for minutes at a time between hours of boredom.
-Viz