#1 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -

One of the first MMOs, I guess we can call it that, I ever got really involved with was the original Guild Wars. It was, and still is, a very interesting experiment in taking the elements of major MMORPGs and reconfiguring them in a new and exciting way.
 
But let's just get to the fucking point. I was in a guild, right? And they were like "Yo, let's go do some fucking PvP." and I was like "I'm level 5." But then I realized I could just go make a max level character from the login screen, and I did, and it was cool. 
 
That feeling was tremendous. 
 
When I look at the MMO market I keep seeing a lot of interesting games, a lot of interesting games that I know I will never play because I don't want to grind mobs for fifty hours. That isn't the part of MMOs that I like, that doesn't appeal to me at all. I like the idea of a huge, open world, I like the concept of a virtual plane being influenced by actual human beings. For some reason though, everyone seems to get hung up on the PvE, like it's a fucking necessity for a game to be enjoyable even though it's been pretty well established that a lot of the people who tend to stick with these games, and continue to renew their subscriptions, are the people who are playing for the max level, end game content. 
  
Now that's just fucking lunacy. 
  
Why spend a majority of your budget creating a huge, sprawling world when no one is going to be spending any time in it once they've reached the level cap> Have some people done it right? Yeah. WoW is a pretty good game, I like the world they've made. Blizzard has a fantastic lore to work with, and I'm sure having infinite money also helps, but most people don't. 
 
Let's look at the big picture here, MMO development isn't about being the best all-around, accessible experience anymore. WoW did that. It's over. You lost. It's about exploring new markets and taking a chunk of that hardcore MMO playerbase that wants something new and not the same shit with a new coat of paint. I mean, we've seen it time and time again. New games come out, do pretty good for the first few months, and then slowly die because everyone realizes it's the same exact thing but worse. The people who are surviving are the ones who realized that innovation and change is the name of the game. Why not just cut the 80% of the game that some people just don't give a shit about and pool all your resources into the remaining 20%? Why not build a smaller, more condensed world that is built solely around the idea of complex, high level play from the get go? it's just raids, just PvP. Or how about a game focusing entirely on world PvP from the start? There are ideas out there, not necessarily new ideas, but ideas that have yet to be fully exploited.
 
Leveling doesn't even mean the end of progression either. Gear is an every present factor, and perhaps their could even be a way to level up skills and abilities through use. It isn't about taking out the number crunching all together, it's about rolling back on all the bonuses so a player can have a distinct advantage but never severely overpower a brand new player. Really, it's all about minimization. Using the world as a platform for engaging gameplay rather than using it for content dumpster. 
 
Main point: WoW already exists, why are most major developers copying the formula rather than taking individual parts and ideas from it and improving upon them? 
 
I'm not a game designer or anything, so there is probably a reason I'm just not getting.
 
Someone elaborate. 
 
(P.S. People who went straight to the reply box to tell me about the MMO they (play/used to play) that doesn't have leveling, 
 
I know. That isn't what we are talking about.)

#2 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

it's just something that happens in games. other game developers keep the wow formula because they hope that it will get people to play. they hope people keep playing because it has the wow things. i do agree that they should expand from the formula. it would be great for them to do that. new things can happen from people expanding from something else. 
 
a MMO without levels would be pretty boring i think.  i think in the end something would replace the level with something else, like gear. there has to be end game content. instead of leveling people will look at gear. the gear would end up being the leveling. if somebody wants to raid they would have to get good gear to begin with. 
 
they could do something like basic stuff like kill boars the entire game. there are these monsters killing things kill them  the entire game. 
 
i had a good times playing WoW back in the burning crusade. it was a lot of fun to play that. i think the addictive part of it was because of the social aspect of the game.  you would log into the game and talk to peopel while grinding. i made a lot of friends with that game. i had a levle 70 orc  rogue with season 1 and 2 arena gear and epic flying mount.

#3 Posted by NekuSakuraba (7241 posts) -

So you want MMOs go straight to the endgame? That would cut out alot of content, however it would be good to see more endgame content at early levels. Like having more low level PVP etc.

As for games not doing anything new just look at DC, that has the action MMO thing done really nicely not to mention a setting that gets away from the fantasy style. Also class based PVP (Legends PVP) os a new thing also. The star wars MMO will probaby also add some new stuff so the genre is developing.

#4 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -
@NekuSakuraba said:
" So you want MMOs go straight to the endgame? That would cut out alot of content, however it would be good to see more endgame content at early levels. Like having more low level PVP etc. As for games not doing anything new just look at DC, that has the action MMO thing done really nicely not to mention a setting that gets away from the fantasy style. Also class based PVP (Legends PVP) os a new thing also. The star wars MMO will probaby also add some new stuff so the genre is developing. "
DC isn't doing anything new. 
They took the atrocious shit they slapped on to Star Wars Galaxies and slapped some DC skins on it.  
Lord of the Rings has kind of the same PVP stuff also, make a Bad Guy character or take your good guy into the arena, that's about it.
#5 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@NekuSakuraba: If you want to get specific about it, what I would prefer is something along the lines of Shattered Galaxy but with gameplay based more around the concepts of the traditional WoW-like MMORPG. Something that is more about territorial control where even new players can have an impact on how a battle plays out. 
 
Is there leveling in that game? Yes, but all the grinding is pointless as hell and it would be a lot better if it wasn't there.
#6 Posted by EvilTwin (3324 posts) -

It seems like you kind of want something action focused, like a shooter?  Well, then, the question becomes "how massive does it have to be to be an MMO?"  Does Battlefield count?  Is there a reason they haven't made a Battlefield game with more people?  Or is an MMO just all about progression?  If there is progression, can you make it meaningful without unbalancing the game for new people?  At some point, aren't you just making APB which was probably the biggest MMO flop yet?  
 
I don't really know what this post is about.  I just started to come up with all of these challenges to making an MMO that wasn't just an Everquest clone and now present them to you.  If you can't think of any good answers, then that's probably why it's so hard to make that game.

#7 Posted by Fistbeard (33 posts) -

One of the problems with that would be the lack of attachment to a character and a severe lack of devotion to anything you may have missed during any events in character progression.
 
Leveling is a staple in MMOs and taking it out of a game would either A) Doom the game seconds after launching or B) Kill a game already on the market.
 
Not to mention that many people (Including myself.) greatly enjoy the leveling process.

#8 Posted by President_Barackbar (3462 posts) -

I think that its really strange that we still call them MMORPGs when they rarely contain much role playing. I think that's where an MMO with no leveling could work. If you really let people play a role, levels and things wouldn't really matter so much.

#9 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@EvilTwin: An MMO is about persistence. It has to be big, it has to be populated, but most of all it has to be persistent. 
 
Everything else is just flavor. 
 
That's why something like MAG isn't an MMO. The gameplay itself isn't a factor, it can be whatever the fuck the developer wants it to be. I played an MMO once that was all about fishing. All you did was fish and talk to people, but it was still an MMO. 
 
Personally, yeah I think something a little more action would be cool. Guild Wars 2 is doing something like that. Come to think of it, I think Guild Wars 2 is doing a lot of this stuff.
#10 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@Fistbeard said:
" One of the problems with that would be the lack of attachment to a character and a severe lack of devotion to anything you may have missed during any events in character progression.  Leveling is a staple in MMOs and taking it out of a game would either A) Doom the game seconds after launching or B) Kill a game already on the market.   Not to mention that many people (Including myself.) greatly enjoy the leveling process. "
See, but that's the point. 
 
There is already a huge market in place for people who enjoy the leveling process, the grinding. So why aren't developers exploring different avenues?
#11 Posted by Fistbeard (33 posts) -
@President_Barackbar: 
 
I have to agree with this to an extent!   WoW still has a few niche realms for actual roleplay, the two I know off hand from experience being Wyrmrest Accord and Moon Guard, both on the US side.  
 
Moon Guard gets a bad (Yet somewhat deserved reputation) for being full of ERP: Erotic Roleplaying. and Wyrmrest is full of elitists and snobs who won't even look at you twice without a 50000 word description or an IC and OOC interview.    I have an 85, an 80 and two 60s on Moon Guard, and if you know where to look and where to avoid, you can find proper roleplaying.
 
/offtopicpost
#12 Posted by TheDukeofArgyll (102 posts) -

People play MMOs for the leveling.  You invest more time and because of it are better then some one who hasn't, that is the point.  There are plenty of other games and genres that have Player versus Player with out leveling, that is the reason behind RPGs.  Taking the leveling out would be like taking the weapons out of shooters.

#13 Posted by Fistbeard (33 posts) -
@LordXavierBritish: 
 
Because the devs know it has a 95% chance of bombing and going the route that Champions Online is currently going.  Grasping at every chance to not fall under.
#14 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@TheDukeofArgyll said:
" People play MMOs for the leveling.  You invest more time and because of it are better then some one who hasn't, that is the point.  There are plenty of other games and genres that have Player versus Player with out leveling, that is the reason behind RPGs.  Taking the leveling out would be like taking the weapons out of shooters. "
If that was actually true you wouldn't have people buying WoW characters or leveling through instances.
#15 Posted by President_Barackbar (3462 posts) -
@TheDukeofArgyll said:
" People play MMOs for the leveling.  You invest more time and because of it are better then some one who hasn't, that is the point.  There are plenty of other games and genres that have Player versus Player with out leveling, that is the reason behind RPGs.  Taking the leveling out would be like taking the weapons out of shooters. "
See, I don't really agree with that. I think that there is a significant segment of MMO players that want some kind of RP experience. Take old Star Wars Galaxies for instance. Most of the fun people had with that game was role playing and doing quest activities, as well as participating in the in game economy and the GCW. When the NGE came in and made the game about the leveling like WoW, people stopped playing it because that's not what they wanted.
#16 Posted by NekuSakuraba (7241 posts) -
@ZeForgotten
@NekuSakuraba said:
" So you want MMOs go straight to the endgame? That would cut out alot of content, however it would be good to see more endgame content at early levels. Like having more low level PVP etc. As for games not doing anything new just look at DC, that has the action MMO thing done really nicely not to mention a setting that gets away from the fantasy style. Also class based PVP (Legends PVP) os a new thing also. The star wars MMO will probaby also add some new stuff so the genre is developing. "
DC isn't doing anything new. 
They took the atrocious shit they slapped on to Star Wars Galaxies and slapped some DC skins on it.  
Lord of the Rings has kind of the same PVP stuff also, make a Bad Guy character or take your good guy into the arena, that's about it.
DC has done the action MMO gameplay fantastically giving you much more control over the gameplay.
#17 Edited by gamefreak9 (2359 posts) -

How bout an RPG without gameplay or roles, know what i mean? its just chill, no pressure. 

#18 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

A MMOFPS.

#19 Posted by TheDudeOfGaming (6078 posts) -

Without leveling huh?I wouldnt play it...

#20 Posted by Marz (5651 posts) -
@LordXavierBritish:  Guild Wars go play it,  you don't really need to level.
#21 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@NekuSakuraba said:
" @ZeForgotten
@NekuSakuraba said:
" So you want MMOs go straight to the endgame? That would cut out alot of content, however it would be good to see more endgame content at early levels. Like having more low level PVP etc. As for games not doing anything new just look at DC, that has the action MMO thing done really nicely not to mention a setting that gets away from the fantasy style. Also class based PVP (Legends PVP) os a new thing also. The star wars MMO will probaby also add some new stuff so the genre is developing. "
DC isn't doing anything new. 
They took the atrocious shit they slapped on to Star Wars Galaxies and slapped some DC skins on it.  
Lord of the Rings has kind of the same PVP stuff also, make a Bad Guy character or take your good guy into the arena, that's about it.
DC has done the action MMO gameplay fantastically giving you much more control over the gameplay. "
You mean like Champions Online and Global Agenda and Tabula Rasa?
#22 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -
@NekuSakuraba said:
" @ZeForgotten
@NekuSakuraba said:
" So you want MMOs go straight to the endgame? That would cut out alot of content, however it would be good to see more endgame content at early levels. Like having more low level PVP etc. As for games not doing anything new just look at DC, that has the action MMO thing done really nicely not to mention a setting that gets away from the fantasy style. Also class based PVP (Legends PVP) os a new thing also. The star wars MMO will probaby also add some new stuff so the genre is developing. "
DC isn't doing anything new. 
They took the atrocious shit they slapped on to Star Wars Galaxies and slapped some DC skins on it.  
Lord of the Rings has kind of the same PVP stuff also, make a Bad Guy character or take your good guy into the arena, that's about it.
DC has done the action MMO gameplay fantastically giving you much more control over the gameplay. "
Nono, listen, just no. 
DC hasn't done the "action MMO gameplay fantastically" and it's not "giving you more control over the gameplay" than Star Wars Galaxies right now. 
Go play both and you will see that gameplay wise it's the exact same damn thing. 
#23 Posted by President_Barackbar (3462 posts) -
@NekuSakuraba:  No offense dude, but this really isn't the proper place to be plugging DCUO. That's not what the topic is about.
#24 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@gamefreak9 said:
" How bout an RPG without gameplay or roles, know what i mean? its just chill, no pressure.  "
The subtraction of leveling doesn't mean the subtraction of complexity. If anything, it means a higher and more immediate learning curve. 
 
@Meteora said:
" A MMOFPS. "
Possibly, but not necessarily. It could work, but I think a more generic MMORPG-like battle system would be preferable when working in an open, persistent world. 
 
@Marz said:
" @LordXavierBritish:  Guild Wars go play it,  you don't really need to level. "
You did not even read the first sentence of this topic. 
 
For shame.
#25 Posted by gamefreak9 (2359 posts) -
@LordXavierBritish:  
Actually i think, theres some concepts that could be taken, like from the Warhammer(the rts) arena mode or w/e(although its not done well), where instead of being with levels your increasing the amount of equipment you can use which might not be better equipment, its just different, and requires different play-styles. I think the final fantasy Job system could be harnessed to some degree, i mean over the years they have made like 100 classes, and it would be cool to just be able to unlock new classes as a reward instead of just making individual ones stronger. I mean there has to be some progression to it for it really to work, not sure how it would work.  
#26 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@gamefreak9 said:
" @LordXavierBritish:  Actually i think, theres some concepts that could be taken, like from the Warhammer(the rts) arena mode or w/e(although its not done well), where instead of being with levels your increasing the amount of equipment you can use which might not be better equipment, its just different, and requires different play-styles. I think the final fantasy Job system could be harnessed to some degree, i mean over the years they have made like 100 classes, and it would be cool to just be able to unlock new classes as a reward instead of just making individual ones stronger. I mean there has to be some progression to it for it really to work, not sure how it would work.   "
I agree 100%. Progression is important, but not necessarily leveling as we know it now.
#27 Posted by NekuSakuraba (7241 posts) -
@ZeForgotten Its not, DC is far better.@President_Barackbar I was just saying that DC did a new MMO type greatly and at low levels you can still PVP.@LordXavierBritish DC has made it more fun in my opinoin.
#28 Posted by gamefreak9 (2359 posts) -
@Meteora:  
Is that you in the pic?? what do you even look like dude?
#29 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

I would be interested to see if there could be a MMO that had combat that was entirely action oriented. An MMO that played like Bayonetta or Ninja Gaiden with customizable characters, weapons, skills, and combos. But no, absolutely no, dice rolls. No numbers popping out of people heads, but life bars like in a fighting game. You could gain new combos and skills through playing through the game, but you wouldn't actually level up in strength. So a new character would have the same basic hitting power as an experienced character, but the experienced character would have more interesting and varied moves that would actually take skill to use affectively.

#30 Posted by Marz (5651 posts) -

so i read what you wrote.    It's hard to justify a monthly fee without a grindy game.  Grinds are intentionally put in these type of games to keep the cash flow going and the players playing.  It would only work if your going the free2play route when development starts.

#31 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@Marz said:
" so i read what you wrote.    It's hard to justify a monthly fee without a grindy game.  Grinds are intentionally put in these type of games to keep the cash flow going and the players playing.  It would only work if your going the free2play route when development starts. "
I don't see grinding as justifying the monthly fee at all. 
  
I pay a subscription for consistent updates and improvements and the persistent world that can only be achieved via dedicated server (Well, no, but the alternative is ridiculous.).
#32 Posted by melcene (3056 posts) -

I'll answer the original post in kind... 
 
Some people just fucking enjoy their PvE. 
 
Yeah, so WoW already exists.  Most MMOs do try to improve or change various aspects.  When they made WoW, they were just copying EQ's formula while changing a few aspects. 
 
People want action?  Go play Planetside.  You want more world PvP right from the start, play Planetside or Warhammer Online.  
 
 
What bothers me most about the MMO community is that people act like because WoW doesn't cater to their desires, nothing for their desires exists.  News flash, WoW isn't the only game out there.

#33 Posted by gakon (1952 posts) -

I'm sorry to have written a novel, but I've been thinking a lot about this stuff, and I've made this thread my avenue to spill out my jumbled thoughts. 
 
To your point about the world itself, I am very much interested in the idea of an MMO that tries to better embody the concept of "Massive".  You look at something like World of Warcraft: Cataclysm (which is unfortunately my only frame of reference for recent MMOs), and what they're doing with storytelling and questing, and it looks to me like they're trying to incorporate more aspects of single-player RPGs into WoW.  So there's more voice acting, actual cutscenes, the experience is more focused, and in some cases they actually have you play by yourself so your own storyline isn't interfered with.  As far as WoW goes, I think the questing is better than it's ever been, but I'm getting hung up on two things. 
 
First, and this point isn't as relevant to this topic, the game is showing it's age.  There's a quest where you climb trees, but to climb a tree you have to "mount" it like a vehicle, which calls up a new action bar.  This bar has buttons that allow you to move up and down the three.  So they're having to wedge new mechanics into old systems, and the result can be sort of ghetto sometimes.  Also, when you look at what Blizzard is doing with the action-oriented minigames they're putting in quests, that stuff may be impressive for WoW, but it's still second-rate when compared to other games.  The scripted events feel the same way, since the game is still mostly locked to a six-year-old animation.  What's interesting to me is how this new style of quests (some of which existed in Burning Crusade, but most of them came around in Wrath, when the vehicle system was introduced) was hailed as a great way to add variety to WoW.  But for me, the majority of these vehicle quests aren't that interesting; they're usually very simple and not difficult due to the engine in which they're contained.  It almost suggests to me that the leveling grind has become so dull that any change of pace becomes a big deal. 
 
My second point is that increasingly, WoW seeks to focus on the exploits of the individual player, at least until the endgame.  I think it was always that way, but as Blizzard incorporates better and more focused storytelling into their zones, this idea becomes more pronounced.  In five levels, I've already saved Mount Hyjal, prevented the collapse of the elemental plane of earth into Azeroth, and assaulted the Twilight's Hammer's main base of operation and killed a handful of their major leaders. (Also, none of these are spoilers, so don't tell me they are.) I did it.  Me. 
 
Now, this really isn't something game-breaking for me.  It's just one of those MMO things that you learn to accept, the same way not all zebras have legs and people stand in line to kill the same bad guy.  I'm more than willing to roll with it.  But it makes me wonder what MMOs are going to better exploit the Massivelyness of the genre.  WoW has had open-world PvP zones that the Alliance and Horde compete for, but they're fighting over control of one zone.  You can have raids of up to 40 people, but as the OP said, these encounters take place in instanced, isolated environments. 
 
EVE Online is a great example of a game that actually utilizes the concepts of a large world with a lot of players.  You might say it's a fringe case and not relevant for how different it is, to which I say naw.  Here's a game that, in a genre where a lot can feel the same, actually does something different, and thrives on human interaction because of the world in which it exists. 
 
I don't think WoW needs to become something entirely different.  It's pretty great the way it is.  But it does make me wonder about an MMO that could contain a world and gameplay systems designed for a large playerbase to interact, both cooperatively and competitively.  I don't know if that game exists right now.  But looking at what Blizzard is doing with WoW, it gives me high hopes for their new MMO, codenamed Titan.

#34 Edited by Marz (5651 posts) -
@LordXavierBritish said:

" @Marz said:

" so i read what you wrote.    It's hard to justify a monthly fee without a grindy game.  Grinds are intentionally put in these type of games to keep the cash flow going and the players playing.  It would only work if your going the free2play route when development starts. "
I don't see grinding as justifying the monthly fee at all.   I pay a subscription for consistent updates and improvements and the persistent world that can only be achieved via dedicated server (Well, no, but the alternative is ridiculous.). "
It would be a terribly small world because there would be no motivation to go out and explore.  They would all sit in a hub city and wait for their next dungeon group.   Probably similar to D & D online where it's just instances with a hub town and max level WoW.  I enjoy leveling, gives me a sense of accomplishment and attachment to my character because we got through the grind together.   I remember when i reached 75 the first time in Final Fantasy XI (lvl cap at the time i was playing)   It was one of the greatest feelings in the world finally reaching that milestone in a fairly brutal leveling system.  If it was a game purely built on end game content, it really wouldn't be a game i would want to play personally, because as of right now in WoW my only motivation to log on is to raid 2 nights a week.    I don't feel 15$ a month was worth the end game content,  it was the short journey from 80-85 that justified it to me.
 
But anyways Guild Wars seems to be the best model for a leveling free system, i can't think of anything else unless you go the APB route but actually make a combat system worth playing.
#35 Posted by DukeTogo (1504 posts) -

You role play in WoW by way of your class and "role" in what you do (damage, heals, etc).  Role play doesn't mandate that you speak in thous and have a backstory for your character, frankly that's pretty ghey and is why the amount of RP servers on all MMOs is insignificant.
 
WWII Online is a persistent fps, kind of like a massive Operation Flashpoint set in WWII.

#36 Posted by melcene (3056 posts) -
@gakon5: LOTRO was supposed to be what you're describing, where it's more about how you and the players around you affect the world.   Also, Horizons (think its now called Istaria)  was kinda like that, where what the players did had an effect on the environment.  Not just YOU the player, but players, as a community.
 
@DukeTogo: WWII Online was a great MMO.  I'm not sure how it is now, but I know that way back when, it was fairly buggy, and unfortunately the graphics were already dated for their time at release.
#37 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
 @gakon5:  That is a fantastic post.
 
@Marz said:
" @LordXavierBritish said:

" @Marz said:

" so i read what you wrote.    It's hard to justify a monthly fee without a grindy game.  Grinds are intentionally put in these type of games to keep the cash flow going and the players playing.  It would only work if your going the free2play route when development starts. "
I don't see grinding as justifying the monthly fee at all.   I pay a subscription for consistent updates and improvements and the persistent world that can only be achieved via dedicated server (Well, no, but the alternative is ridiculous.). "
It would be a terribly small world because there would be no motivation to go out and explore.  They would all sit in a hub city and wait for their next dungeon group.   Probably similar to D & D online where it's just instances with a hub town and max level WoW.  I enjoy leveling, gives me a sense of accomplishment and attachment to my character because we got through the grind together.   I remember when i reached 75 the first time in Final Fantasy XI (lvl cap at the time i was playing)   It was one of the greatest feelings in the world finally reaching that milestone in a fairly brutal leveling system.  If it was a game purely built on end game content, it really wouldn't be a game i would want to play personally, because as of right now in WoW my only motivation to log on is to raid 2 nights a week.    I don't feel 15$ a month was worth the end game content,  it was the short journey from 80-85 that justified it to me.  But anyways Guild Wars seems to be the best model for a leveling free system, i can't think of anything else unless you go the APB route but actually make a combat system worth playing. "  
That's because end game content doesn't take advantage of the world because PvE is using up most of it. 
 
What if the entire world was a battlefield? Not like in WoW with sporadic duels with few objectives, but something more focused. Something that takes advantage of the massive world.
#38 Posted by Ben99 (1135 posts) -

leveling up is makes your progress obvious . Like in your face  and that's fun especially for casual gamers like me .

#39 Posted by Example1013 (4834 posts) -

I had a post based on your topic, but you actually said something that just absolutely changed it. 
 
 
@LordXavierBritish said:

" @NekuSakuraba: If you want to get specific about it, what I would prefer is something along the lines of Shattered Galaxy but with gameplay based more around the concepts of the traditional WoW-like MMORPG. Something that is more about territorial control where even new players can have an impact on how a battle plays out.  Is there leveling in that game? Yes, but all the grinding is pointless as hell and it would be a lot better if it wasn't there. "
Minus maybe the Shattered Galaxy part (I know nothing about that game), Shadowbane fits this post perfectly. The whole game was a world on a server. There were a few small safe zones (a low-level zone, and a couple of NPC cities). That was it for safety. The entire rest of the map was made up of dozens of player-owned cities. Full open-world PVP. You could kill anyone at any time, at any level, including your own guildmates, and even your own groupmates. 
 
The central premise of the game was sieging other players' cities for control of them. The whole point was just to fight other guilds/players, and win, taking and owning trees, holding reputation, and also controlling mines, which generated resources used both for city maintenance and to create gear. That was it. 
 
There was no grinding. Leveling a character to max might take a day, maybe 2. Gathering enough gold to buy a full set of high-tier gear could take maybe a couple of hours. There were literally no quests at all in that game. None. Not a single quest. The only meaningful PvE (besides farming and power leveling) was battling an epic-level creature. These were guys who, when I was there to take on one with my guild, we sat there, most of the 15-20 of us there running 2-3 characters, attacking and healing for like an hour to take it down. These creatures could 2-shot a single person. And that was the only real PvE. 
 
I spent most of my time during the last year or two just out solo killing tons of people. The game wasn't all that populated (maybe 500 regular players across 3 servers, not counting asian zerg), but as long as you could find opponents, you'd have the most fun game of all time. 
 
The game shut down in June. However, a dedicated group of guys are working on an emulator, called Play To Crush. I will say, however, that if you read the review some guy put up on this site, a lot of the bugs were accurate when the game was live, and while the emulator team has been working on making a much better-functioning game, there still may be issues. 
 
So tell me, is that more like what you were talking about?
#40 Posted by kingzetta (4307 posts) -

It's called Monster Hunter

#41 Posted by Skytylz (4033 posts) -
@TheDudeOfGaming said:
" Without leveling huh?I wouldnt play it... "
#42 Posted by Bloodgraiv3 (2712 posts) -
@Marz said:
" @LordXavierBritish:  Guild Wars go play it,  you don't really need to level. "

 
Umm, thats bullshit.
#43 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -
@example1013: That sounds interesting, but at the same time it just sounds like a less complex EVE without the huge grind. 
 
EVE, actually, has a lot of elements I like. If it wasn't for the massive fucking grind it would almost be a perfect fit. 
 
Also, Shattered Galaxy is kind of a MMORTS. It's a really cool game that you can pretty much just jump into and enjoy at any level. It takes a really long grind and a lot of other shit to get anywhere though.
#44 Posted by Example1013 (4834 posts) -
@LordXavierBritish: Yeah, Shadowbane and EVE do share many similar elements. I haven't played EVE, but from what I know, they're sorta similar. However, while there's not necessarily as much to do in EVE (basically just mine control fights, sieges, and solo/group random PvP), I'd hesitate to call the game less complex. The creation system was probably one of the most complex ones in existence. There were literally 100+ ways to make a viable character in the game for solo play. Less options were available for making groups, but it was still really complex. 
 
Just as an example: damage type was a huge thing to worry about when speccing groups, especially with jewelry. You could get jewelry to resist all different kinds of elemental damage, so if you ran into a group dealing one type of damage, you wanted to counter that. 
 
There were some balance issues. Melee characters (warrior-types) were a bit more powerful in general than most magic specs, simply because they dealt good damage and had good health. That's not to say that a magic spec was at an automatic disadvantage, though. You could make a group of healer-nukers that absolutely tanked other groups, depending on the situation. 
 
I mean, it's really actually hard to explain the way the game works to someone who's never even run the program, because creation, tactics, and everything take a long time to learn based on how complex the system is. Like, as in some people might take up to a year before they can build a decent character on their own. 
 
It's not the same as EVE, I can guarantee you. Some of the guys I ran with have tried basically every single MMO out there in search of a Shadowbane replacement (since it has serious bugs, it can get boring, and more importantly, it was shut down last June), and all I've heard is that the game is unique, and that there's nothing else like it out there. 
 
I mean, the only thing is, that because of how steep the learning curve is, I can't necessarily say you'll enjoy it if it were available and you picked it up today. But if you stuck with the game, and learned the system, I think it'd satisfy what you're looking for. 
 
 
 
Here's one example of how different it is: the camera angle is completely independent of your character's direction, and you click with your mouse on the spot you want to move to. So you can look behind you while running to a spot. This might seem alien, but it's really actually very tactical, because you can watch what's going on all around you at all times. Very different from WoW and other MMORPGs.