99 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

 

I could also reference some modern Action RPGs that don't utilise levels too:

 

Spoiler

FIFA and NBA2K. :^)

 

lolno

 

Di Maria is level 88

and

Ronaldo is level 92!

 

They deserve it though.

[B.A. Broska]

For the same reason that ME had, quite literally, 1 and 2% increases in ability power between the big stuff. It was the same back then. It serves as a sense of progression without having much effect on gameplay until you reach the critical point of an upgrade.

Can you give an example of a game where it adds nothing? For me personally it definitely does add something, it adds a sense of progression. That alone makes it worthwhile in many cases.

 

Actually the Mass Effect series is my example, you may feel a sense of progression from the mere act of putting numbers in a spreadsheet but unless it has a tangible effect on my gameplay experience I don't. Besides from a story point of view it is already established that Shepard is the most amazing person in the galaxy and Shepard does not really grow much as a character so even if the leveling up system was to simulate character growth (which in the Mass Effect series it clearly does not) I don't feel it is necessary in this particular series, it feels to me like the only reason there is a leveling up mechanic in the game is because of some misconception that the game needs a leveling up system to be considered an RPG, I honestly feel that there are far better and more effective systems they could have used in it's place to allow for different character builds.

[Sully13]

It can be done well and it can be done badly. like in Risen where you play a lobottomy patiant who needs to be taught how to walk and talk.

[Althix]

i believe problem lies in the fact that "hardcore" gamers, who like to think on what they are doing, who like to earn this or that, who like to face challenge and overcome it are not longer target audience for quite some time.

casual gamers who would like to spent 1-2 hours here and there without any complications or stress (be it pvp, puzzle, leveling system etc.) are indeed target audience. and this audience is paying money for their fun.

 

"hardcore" gamer will grind his way, when casual gamer most likely buy his way. result is the same for the players, but for a developer result is different.

 

I will bring DAI as example. DAI has dumb down mechanics all around, be it gambit(tactics), combat and crafting (read like this: you don't need it unless you play DAI on Nightmare.) Basically DAI could just be a visual novel, and not very good at that.

 

So yeah, EA most likely is gonna defend their position that one button-solve-it-all is good way to make games. But i also want to remind you guys about some other trend of EA about BF games - when they said that people like to pay for bullets. Yeah right...

 

However in the end it all comes down to the preferences: some people will embrace this, some people will not.

 

As for myself - i enjoy good mechanics in the game. And character development is one of such mechanics. It's not necessary should be a 'level up' system, but some progression should be present in the game.

[Isichar]

Yes and no. I don't feel leveling itself is a MUST as much as an established progression system that works well. It's satisfying for the player to level up and it gives them something to work towards on a the more short term scale. A lot of people have come to expect it in the more RPG focused games, but even in those cases I feel there are other systems that can be substituted in to various degrees of success and effectiveness.

 

You can still remove it completely and still have a good game, but as a whole it is something that can enhance the game as you're progressing through it short term.

[Sebby]

MFW I actually liked the Mako

 

Poor Mako gets hated because it's associations with poorly designed copy and pasted filler maps.

[Isichar]

why is leveling a must? What if I create a system that throws away all of the levels and just focuses on a different kind of progression itself? Just for the sake of conversation

I don't feel leveling itself is a MUST

[Isichar]

Oh **** my bad. A bit late here. Carry on.

 

No worries! I'm getting a bit tired myself here

[Lotion Soronarr]

Nah, you don't need leveling. Many games never had it actually.

 

Did Monkey Island have leveling? Full Throttle?

Outcast? Doom? Super Mario? Worms? Need for Speed? Freespace? X-Wing?

 

No.

There is no such thing as the One True Way to make a game. There is no set of mechnics that is universal and always right.

[Seraphim24]

You don't role play in JRPGs? Damn, I guess all the ROLES the characters PLAY in Fire Emblem (or any other game with a class system) don't mean anything.

 

Ok not making a statement about JRPGs really, they're all well and good, it doesn't matter really here anyway.

 

Anyway I think leveling up is interesting because it provides an interesting mechanic when you don't have scaling. It's like, oh should I pillage the lower forests for additional gems? The monsters are low level, but the gems are low quality. However I can also take on the upper forests for high quality gems, the risk is higher, but the additional reward substantially outweighs the risk. Leveling up interfaces with the rest of the world to create game decisions. When everything just scales or leveling is meaningless, then that choice doesn't exist, you just go where gems are in highest quantity. It simplifies the game and makes it less of a game and more of a chore.. possibly.. anyway. 

 

The problem IMO was scaling being added to everything not that leveling was boring, at least IMO.

[Raizo]

I do.

I realise that most modern ( re. Western ) rpg's have some form of system where enemies scale to the players level thus rendering the concept of exp and levels moot but I'm old school, I got into rpg's back in the day when all you had to do when you hit a wall that you could not get past was power level past the level of the bad guys.

I know that the times have changed, jrpg's are dying and western RPGs are on the rise but I need to hold on to some of the mechanics of the past. To me, an rpg is no longer an rpg without exp or levelling up.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Enemy scaling can work within certain cirucumstances and depending on how it's done. The Baldur's Gate games had enemy scaling, and you wouldn't know it.

 

However the kind of level scaling that somehow became prevalent RPG design when Oblivion came out is dumb as hell.

[Raizo]

Huh?

  

I know, I was gonna sign in just to reply to that.
Edit: the real problem is all the loli. So much loli...

Fair enough but now a days that's what it seems like, at least to me.

The 8 bit, 16 bit, 32bit generations had jrpg's crawling out of the woodwork. At this point and stage of the 360's lifespan we knew Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey were on the way not to mention Tri Ace games like Infinite Undiscovery, Star Ocean: Last Story and Resonance of Faith.

Final Fantasy XV withstanding ( a franchise which no longer carries as much weight as it used to ) and Persona 5 I'm not really sure what jrpg's are in the works for the PS4 and XBix One.