Discussion on Heroes/Leveling Cont

[VariousNames]

That's a big if, they said it would not be over the top in the video and they have said before that it will not be like in killing floor, So I don't see what the problem is.

one could argue that its more realistic over time because you you would get better at those things over time.

Not over the top means what?

I can probably find you the post, which I used as an example, where one of the TW dudes said maybe a 5% (as an example) margin on suppression resistance

That's fine, I already used that number as an example. 5% is not much, but when you say 5% less stamina loss and 5% more max stamina (both of which are categories in the beta footage), that's a 10% longer sprint time for capped players. The point is with 5 categories, a margin of 5% in each category stacks horizontally.

PS, this "realism" crap is really getting on my nerves because I debunked this a long time ago to no objections from anyone.

In real life you die and all your experience is washed away when you respawn as a fresh greenhorn. If experience accumulated until you died, that would be realistic, but the whole point of this Heroes leveling system is that it's persistent....as in, it persists beyond death and it persists beyond the present match. That would be equivalent to you reincarnating after death into another soldier and having all his experience, and all that XP accumulating throughout each reincarnation, which I regret to tell you is not realistic, not on this planet/dimension.

 

[CopperHead]

Well, I've heard the TWI rhetoric, of what there plans are...


Honestly, I really just wish they wouldn't have done this stupid class progression crap..

It just seems like it wasn't meant to be in this type of game.

But because I already assume that any amount of sound logic won't change the fact that it will be in the game, I am just trying to get over it.

Yeah it sucks. It really sucks. It would have been perfectly fine without it, keep all the stats and all, but this leveling, and increasing different abilities... it looks alot like KF to me.

 

[Fedorov]

While I always supported the hero leveling, a leveling that's hard to understand and takes into account all kinds of abstract teamplay related actions. I really don't think the idea of individual weapon progress based on kills is a good thing.

There is probably gonna be a white list, and it may work only online with a minimum number of players (like the current Ostfront achievements) So I doubt its gonna turn into a nightmare like TF2.

It'll certainly keep the players playing, and most of the time, doing their jobs will be the best way to obtain those needed kills, so it really does not conflict with the gameplay.

Shut up Fedorov! didn't you say you were against the kills system?... Ok, I explain the real reasons why I'm against it. The main problem is that leveling stuff is a very powerful psychological tool. It will IMO effectively divert a lot of attention from the game itself. It could end up with a MORE addictive, but LESS enjoyable game, because there is that extra layer of pressure that shouldn't be there at all.

You'll probably have a level of interest much higher at the beginning of the game, but as you unlock stuff, the drug that kept you motivated loses its power, and could end up with an inverse effect, a situation in which you say: Why should I keep playing if I already unlocked everything? This is just a theory, but I think that the system could probably block people from realizing where the true enjoyment of the game is, and thus provoking a great drop of interest as time goes by, no matter how good the game actually is.

So no, the problem is not that people will try to exploit it (they will), because that problem could be solved with lots of complicated measures. Those measures and the leveling system as a whole, however, take a lot of development time, time that could be better invested in making it an even better game, which would in turn, keep the level of interest and enjoyment high, without the need for cheap (but powerful) psychological tools.

How to implement a hero system without leveling? The game could determine, based on a combination of all your stats, that you know how to play, and you are not a griefer. Then, from all players who matches this condition, the game randomly chooses one or two heroes per team. As for other types of starts (is realistic, that not everybody is the same), veterans, recruits, stamina, etc... You could dynamically and randomly change the avatar with each respawn, without having to tie it to any leveling system.

A good game does not need a leveling system to keep people playing for a very long time and Ostfront proves it. Its gameplay is addictive AND enjoyable on its own. Don't add drugs to a tasty cake, because in the end, people will just ignore the cake and take the drugs; and when they get tired and drop the drugs too, they won't take the cake back.

I'm certainly going to enjoy this game and I know that the system is here to stay, but if time proves my theory to be right, I really hope you guys reconsider its implementation in RO3.

 

[LightsabeR]

The main problem is that leveling stuff is a very powerful psychological tool. It will IMO effectively divert a lot of attention from the game itself. It could end up with a MORE addictive, but LESS enjoyable game, because there is that extra layer of pressure that shouldn't be there at all.

You'll probably have a level of interest much higher at the beginning of the game, but as you unlock stuff, the drug that kept you motivated loses its power, and could end up with an inverse effect, a situation in which you say: Why should I keep playing if I already unlocked everything? This is just a theory, but I think that the system could probably block people from realizing where the true enjoyment of the game is, and thus provoking a great drop of interest as time goes by, no matter how good the game actually is.

I think this is a very just concern and effects like this can be seen in many of the popular FPS games nowadays. Many of the "current generation" FPS gamers have started to play FPS games primarily to level up and not to simply enjoy the game.

I believe that this is largely due to the fact that most of the currently popular FPS games are just not interesting enough and without these extra incentives, people simply wouldn't play them as much. The games are just too easy and depend too much on random luck, so there's little incentive for people practice and get better at them. More importantly tho, players don't feel as if they are getting better at the game, since there really is no learning curve, which can be demoralizing.

With that said, I don't think RO2 will suffer from those issues, since it will have a learning curve, so the extra incentive that a leveling system brings, is not really needed. Then again, based on my reasoning above, if a game can stand on its own two feet without a leveling system, and keep players engaged in striving to get better, then does it really matter if it exists or not?

 

[jalex3]

I think its possible to enjoy a game and enjoy leveling up, abit to much silent majority bull going on if you ask me.

It will not stop not enjoy the game. though I do think it should be you getting better aim over time not your character.

 

[LightsabeR]

I think its possible to enjoy a game and enjoy leveling up

Yes, definitely.

But the issue Fedorov brought up is that if a game relies too much on a leveling system, then once the level cap is reached, the extra psychological incentive that people had will cease to exist, which might cause some people to stop playing, or at least give them a feeling that something is lacking.

Tho again, since I do believe (and hope) that RO2 won't suffer from the issue of being boring without the leveling system, then adding it on top of an already great game should not be as damaging as it is for games that... well... suck.

 

[monster]

I've been playing RO for years.

If this is truly the leveling system in RO2, I will continue to play RO for years.

 

[Welshie]

Then the answer is simple and something I've said before, If there is positive XP, then there should also be Negative XP.
This keeps the game both exciting for people who like Stats and XP and perks and also keep the game fair and add longevity.
No One can say they've always had a perfect round in any FPS, no One can say they've never TKed or been on the losing team, all this can be reflected with both positive and Negative XP.
But it will be a very brave company that will introduce Neg XP, unlike Neg Rep

 

[wahoo4]

The perk system IS realistic. Leveling keeps people interesting in the game long enough to get used to it. It's a simple way to get people into the game long enough to work past the learning curve. Bottom line, people like to work to improve their character and to be more powerful. At least in their mind. It's the hope things will improve in time with perks when in reality they get used to he movement and feel. It makes sense and I'm glad TWI implemented it in a good way. Win for me and TWI. lol

http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=49020&highlight=wahoo4&page=2

Post #38

 

[Andrey.V]

Hi all
Well what is leveling is not leveling at all
its there but it does not do anything, its progressing when you play
but does not effect anything at all
just crazy idea of mine

 

[VariousNames]

The perk system IS realistic.

No, it isn't.

Please do not respond if you're not going to refute my objection, which stands to date literally unanswered.

The perk system is not realistic because it persists beyond death. In real life you gain experience, and then you die, you take a dirt nap, and you're not level 20 any more, you're level 0: Dead.

Bottom line, people like to work to improve their character and to be more powerful. At least in their mind. It's the hope things will improve in time with perks when in reality they get used to he movement and feel

The quality of the game is the quality of the gameplay mechanics. What you have proposed makes it a shallow experience and replaces exploration with a grinding experience to unlock powerups instead of carefully finetuning tactics and skill.

At worst, it is a distraction, which is the flipside of what you mentioned (people playing in spite of not enjoying the game).

My position is, and I maintain this vigorously, if you are not enjoying the game, if you do not find it a quality experience, you should stop playing. Playing with people's psychological response to work vs reward is in my opinion an unethical way of bringing people into an experience. If you've not spent a few hundred hours getting lost in an MMORPG, you really don't understand what I mean by this. I regret to inform all of you that playing a game in order to unlock intangible rewards that do not affect the real world is a self destructive addiction.

 

[Reise]

No, it isn't.

Please do not respond if you're not going to refute my objection, which stands to date literally unanswered.

The perk system is not realistic because it persists beyond death. In real life you gain experience, and then you die, you take a dirt nap, and you're not level 20 any more, you're level 0: Dead.

So I suppose no soldiers in reality ever stood out in some way. Everyone was just fresh off the respawn counter in Stalingrad and had identical talents and equipment.

 

[Fedorov]

Playing with people's psychological response to work vs reward is in my opinion an unethical way of bringing people into an experience. If you've not spent a few hundred hours getting lost in an MMORPG, you really don't understand what I mean by this. I regret to inform all of you that playing a game in order to unlock intangible rewards that do not affect the real world is a self destructive addiction.

I have spent hundreds of hours in an MMO and I know what is like.

It appeals to the same areas of the brain as web based games like "Ogame" or those facebook social games that suck everyone's life. Just because lots of people playing it doesn't mean is fun, just like tobacco. People plays it because it creates an artificial "need", but that's exploiting anxiety, and the reward only momentarily calms it. Anxiety nullifies enjoyment.

RO should stay away from it. Its genuine and legitimate fun has kept many people playing it for 6-7 years. Longer than any MMO, and with a much higher levels of enjoyment.

 

[ductape3]

Leveling keeps people interesting in the game long enough to get used to it. It's a simple way to get people into the game long enough to work past the learning curve. Bottom line, people like to work to improve their character and to be more powerful. At least in their mind. [/URL]

This is an excellent point. One of the big turnoffs that people had to ROOST was the massive learning curve. TWI has talked about increasing accessibility, and I think that this is one of the ways that they can do it. By giving the player an incentive to keep playing, they can be guided past the hump in the learning curve, get past the frustration, and really be sucked into the amazing game that it is.

Many games rely on the leveling system as a carrot to keep the player playing. By giving them upgrades and perks and prestige ranks they keep the player interested until the next installment comes out. They have no learning curve in their play other than the memorization of maps or finally getting body armor or magnum ammo.

HoS will have a very defined learning curve, just like ROOST. The leveling will serve a very different purpose here, to keep people playing until the learning curve starts to level out for them. This leveling system will help them to see that they are making progress for the first couple of weeks and then once they relearn how to shoot in a game, how to move from cover to cover and stay concealed. Once they have learned to play, they wont be so frustrated and will be more likely to stay on for the excellent gameplay.

The leveling system will give new players that little nudge that they need to get past the learning curve, to come out of the shadows and into the brilliant light of the sun that is HoS.

Undoubtedly there will be some will be seared by this light and will crawl back into the dark depths of shadow provided by games that we will not mention. But fear not, for they are beyond redemption.





Sorry, I got a little carried away there at the end

 

[Proud_God]

I'm certainly not a fan of this levelling system. That being said, unlocking new weapons, I can live with, but altering the behaviour of weapons over time is just... wrong.

 

[LugNut]

The main problem is that leveling stuff is a very powerful psychological tool. It will IMO effectively divert a lot of attention from the game itself.

Absolutely, Ive sat and listened to more TS/Vent chat BS about leveled up weapons than I ever need to again. For many gamers being able to run around the battle field with their uber cool, gold plated, dingle balled, pimp blaster has become a point of pride. What ever happened to simply showing off your abilities by helping your team win?

I disagree that it's necessary in any way to either keep new players interest or keep the game going for years after release, Gameplay alone should be able to do this and thinking that gimmicks are necessary is selling HOS short.

 

[wahoo4]

Why debate something that won't matter after a month? Anyone who play RO2 for any length of time will max out the rank system and everyone will be the same. I really doubt RO2's ranking system will really be game changing or unbalanced. I always hated the extra body armor and super ammo. Those types of perks change avatar hit points and creates unbalance.

Variousnames, if dead equals zero? lol Sorry it's a video game buddy and wow this is realism to the extreme. Should everyone start out as an infant again? No, TWI has incorporated it in a realistic and classy way. I think getting new people over the learning curve is far more important. It seems like some people are more worried about the other guy getting that extra one level up because he bought the game 4 hours early than you did. lol

These perks are realistic. Training, experience, and talent factor into real life.
YouTube - How to shoot a pistol.

No, it isn't.

Please do not respond if you're not going to refute my objection, which stands to date literally unanswered.

The perk system is not realistic because it persists beyond death. In real life you gain experience, and then you die, you take a dirt nap, and you're not level 20 any more, you're level 0: Dead.



The quality of the game is the quality of the gameplay mechanics. What you have proposed makes it a shallow experience and replaces exploration with a grinding experience to unlock powerups instead of carefully finetuning tactics and skill.

At worst, it is a distraction, which is the flipside of what you mentioned (people playing in spite of not enjoying the game).

My position is, and I maintain this vigorously, if you are not enjoying the game, if you do not find it a quality experience, you should stop playing. Playing with people's psychological response to work vs reward is in my opinion an unethical way of bringing people into an experience. If you've not spent a few hundred hours getting lost in an MMORPG, you really don't understand what I mean by this. I regret to inform all of you that playing a game in order to unlock intangible rewards that do not affect the real world is a self destructive addiction.

 

[VariousNames]

Why debate something that won't matter after a month? Anyone who play RO2 for any length of time will max out the rank system and everyone will be the same.

You don't know that.

Ive gotten the impression from scattered developer comments that the intention is to make it so that not everyone running around is a "hero," and also so that you won't be a hero within a week of heavy grinding.

And regardless, wasting effort on unnecessary levelups, no matter how much effort that is, is still wasted effort.

You may think that levelups are a fun distraction the first three times you do it, but if you've been playing roleplaying games for 5 years, I guarantee you the next time you see "level 1" you'll say "again, god **** it?" I am sick and tired of leveling up, I have done it a dozen times already. I'm done playing "levelup." It's not a fun game.

Variousnames, if dead equals zero? lol Sorry it's a video game buddy and wow this is realism to the extreme.

Should everyone start out as an infant again? No, TWI has incorporated it in a realistic and classy way. I think getting new people over the learning curve is far more important. It seems like some people are more worried about the other guy getting that extra one level up because he bought the game 4 hours early than you did. lol

I was literally physically stunned when I read this on account of the fact that you had written a blatant contradiction.

Is your criterion realism or isn't it? You can't sit here and tell me the system is realistic and then tell me I'm too obsessed with realism when I point out that it isn't.

Is the system realistic or isn't it?

These perks are realistic. Training, experience, and talent factor into real life.

No they aren't, for the reasons that I mentioned, that you did not contest. The only thing you had to say to my objections, which still stand, is that they are "too realistic," which is not a valid objection.

Training, experience, and talent factor into real life until you get shot. This system does not model that, and is pointless on account of that. The distribution of those traits should not be based on how many hours you've spent dying on Konigsplatz. That's not how real life works.

And since this is a videogame after all, as you pointed out, I feel the need to point out the gameplay implications with this system.

The most realistic system would be to simulate the ability gains of experience per spawn and to wipe those gains per death, starting fresh per spawn. Talent and basic training could be simulated with a randomized system that does NOT distribute those benefits on the basis of how long you've been playing the game.

The whole reason you should NOT distribute those benefits based off of playtime is that it gives an unnecessary advantage to the most skilled players, who are already without a doubt already mauling the new players and do not need that advantage. That is a gameplay consideration, which brings me to my next point, which is that,

For the sake of how arbitrary and pointless this entire effort to simulate varying levels of soldier competence is, it should be removed entirely and all players should have the same basic toolkit. Keep it simple, keep it forthright and honest, and for the love of god don't give me anything to blame when I get fragged. I want to know that when I get fragged it's because I kept my head up like an idiot too long and this sharpshooter painted my face with a bullet, or because the guy on the other end was simply a better marksman than I was.

 

[wahoo4]

Variousnames your intellectual is far too great to fight. We have a lot of educated men running the country, but they sure could use some good all common sense.

 

[Devil_Inside]

Dunno about you guys, but I actually have more fun killing skilled players which have an additional advantage. That's the only way you can "grow" and get better at something.
I have absolutely no problem with the leveling system. And I believe it is more fun, as it will give you an incentive to try different weapons and classes.

I also agree that at the beginning, leveling up might help some players get used to the game, as I have a few friends who play games like OFP and ARMA, but they just couldn't understand how fun RO:OST was. I believe they just haven't spent enough time with it. So if leveling would help them get past those few days of "frustration", then I'm all for it!

P.S. I'm pretty sure though, that RO:HOS won't need that, as it will be "playable" from the start.