I naturally outlevel my casual friends just from more /played time. I'm trying my best to slow down on my Lore-Master in LOTRO, but even my attempt to shift to crafting results in a fair bit of exp while I farm Wargs for leather. I've even passed Nelgdorf and Nazrin by several levels.

Being able to play compelling content together with my friends has been an issue in almost every MMORPG I've played, either because of myself pulling ahead or someone else.

City of Heroes has several tools to get around the problem, including the Sidekick system (which I adore) and now the Leveling Pact (which divides exp between two players, even while one is logged out). CoH's advances have been embraced by EQ2's Mentoring and Final Fantasy XI's Level Sync, but other games haven't adopted the ideas.

There are three reasons why I assume level disparity between friends is accepted (and even preferred) in MMORPG design:

• As Pacing for storyline, leveling is a good game mechanic, but it may be so finely tuned that it just doesn't allow for adjustments like syncing.
• Leveling independently is often considered as a rite of passage to 'know your class'. In other words, it's pacing for character growth. Any perceived boost may be seen by the playerbase as unfair gains: This was an issue in Age of Conan, where many players balked at the mentoring system until it was nerfed past usefulness.
• Level disparity feeds The Vision, which dictates that you should find and group with new acquaintances while you level up so you'll have sticky in-game-only friends at Endgame to make it emotionally difficult to leave the game.

Simpler and more apt for my current situation:

I wish LOTRO had something akin to Vanguard's Reduced XP Gain spell. Basically, some way to lock my level and not gain any exp until my friends catch up. I think nearly every MMORPG could benefit from a Level Lock feature (The Vision be damned).

Imagine players who would like to experience the old pre-expansion raiding content by locking their levels at the old Endgame. Or roleplayers who don't wish to grow up past Hobbiton. Granted, most would probably still prefer to be competitive at the very top of the scale, but what a natural way for developers to stretch content further, via player choice.

And it would as easy as candy to implement too.

I've requested a Level Lock feature via a post on Turbine's suggestions forum. I hope they're listening. =)

I don't subscribe to the theory that gamers are anti-social nerds who hide in their basements and have no real friends. Too many MMORPGs seem designed around that cliché, that we're loners who need new introductions in order to play a social game.

Leveling systems are used as motivation for players to push through content. But players of disparate levels don't mesh well together, so grouping with your existing friends is usually tossed aside in favour of constantly finding new ones. Grouping and guild tools operate as a social introduction system, trying to integrate you with others at the same level.

It was understandable a decade ago. Back when Everquest was released, it was unlikely that your real-life friends would be playing an online subscription game, so you needed mechanics that helped you group with strangers. But now this genre is mainstream and even if players aren't together with their local buddies, they're bound to have strong bonds from other games as they migrate to the newer MMOs. Cross-game guilds are becoming commonplace.

Some games even require a large diverse population for the content to work correctly. WAR is the biggest example so far: if players aren't active and working together in any given area, the content just doesn't work. Players are sorted into level tiers, realms and racial pairings, so new bonds are needed between players even more, if only temporarily for the task at hand. This is supposed to be 'epic'.

But I already have friends.

I'm okay with adding a few new friends now and then, but I don't need a pool of hundreds of them. I'd rather concentrate my time with a few close friends that I can relate to. The 'epic' crowds are more of a sideline interest, I like them there, but not at the expense of my primary enjoyment of simply playing together with my friends. Most of the group and guild tools aren't helping that.

The number one reason I enjoy Endgame is because eventually I end up on even strength as my friends and only then can we enjoy challenging game content together. Unfortunately, most Endgame content then shifts to even larger groups (raiding, warband sieges, etc.), presumably to reinforce the need for yet more new friends.

When Cryptic created their Sidekick / Mentoring system to allow players to pair up and balance their level differences, I thought it would be a paradigm shift for all MMORPGs. I was shocked that Blizzard didn't implement the feature for World of Warcraft's release. I was also disappointed that Age of Conan gave barely more than lip-service to mentoring, it was poorly implemented and quickly nerfed because it didn't match their content. WAR has similar features automated within tiers for Scenarios and RvR, but again it's a limited and half-assed implementation that doesn't come anywhere close to resolving the essential problem while leveling.

I have friends. I'd like to play with my friends, not just chat with my friends while I play.

No wonder Left 4 Dead has had phenomenal pre-order sales, it's a game focused on small groups of players cooperating together. Friends. It's a a shame the MMORPG genre hasn't learned from the popularity of small-team coop games.

MMORPGs should focus on content that allows players to get together in small groups of their own choosing.

Please give me more tools and content to play with my existing small group of friends.

With an audience of 10 million, what's so bad about World of Warcraft?

Last night I defended Richard Bartle's stance that MMORPG games could be so much better. He uses World of Warcraft as his example in a rambling sort of way, but this part is key to me:

Forgetting the specific example of Kharazan for a moment, there's the pissing on the players quote and it's bang on the money. Exact. I don't need to pull a bunch of Tigole faux pas quotes from Blizzard to tell you that there's a hamster wheel grind intentionally inherent to these games and WoW specifically.

When WoW was released, it was heralded as the solution to the grind in MMORPGs. What happened? It wasn't, that's what. Blizzard applied bandaids like removing XP loss on death, but then kept the base model of Everquest with "The Vision" still at its core, refining it even deeper in their Endgame as time went by. They discovered very quickly that it was cheaper to stretch content than provide as much as players wanted.

The defining part of "The Vision" is that the game's progress traps the player in, making them continue playing not just for fun, but for rewards that lead to further rewards.

It's no mistake that these games are often labelled as addictive, because from an outside perspective there's wonder that people will play past their enjoyment. Gordon Walton has summed this up:

Just like Everquest, mark my words, if Blizzard continues to inflict tasks on players without enough corresponding fun, it will slowly move from accolades to vilification. I've become jaded about the game myself and I encounter more and more other players that feel the same way.

Now I'm going to *gasp* say something positive about WAR. Mythic has focused much of their development efforts on reducing the grind. They've specifically catered to those that want satisfying PvP combat from level 1 up. They've improved many of the "oh god, not this again" moments in questing. They are in the good space that Blizzard was 4 years ago. If this stuff bugs you but you still want to play MMORPGs, then WAR may be your best tonic.

But I do wonder, with this push to improve, why are they still on the base model of Everquest? The same goes for Age of Conan, where the attitude at Funcom is that of course you have to start with that, it's the base right? Thank goodness for the awesome combat in AoC.

As much as I'm enjoying these games, I think evolving on the EQ model is an uphill battle against what its core design principles stood on. Standing up and questioning the trappings is something players should do if they truly want to see the grind go away.

Edit: I've edited much of this post, not because it was incendiary, but because it's been better addressed by Richard Bartle's own response. Even edited, this is still a bit meandering, I think my followup is better.

  ·  ·  ·

The debate of the day seems to be revolving around a recent Massively interview with Richard Bartle, where he lumps Age of Conan and Warhammer into the same pile as World of Warcraft. This offended some folks who are particularly passionate about this specific genre. Keen went as far as to call out Dr. Bartle to educate himself better on the differences between games in the genre.

Keen has a point, if you're going to speak out on something, it helps to know the details.

The thing is, Massively's Michael Zenke was obviously looking for another perverse quote like last years "I'd shut down WoW". Richard Bartle isn't interested in any game based on the EQ / WoW model and whether you're hyped for WAR or not, you have to admit that's the genre it's in. He keeps getting asked, so he's forced himself to play the games and of course playing that way he's had a horrible time.

Are we stuck with the Everquest model?

You probably know the basics of most MMORPG gameplay from WoW, but it's essentially the same model that was Everquest.

The real question: Is the EQ-derived model a Wheel-like invention that's essential for these games? There's this big assumption that's what an MMORPG should start with, then patch in all of the features to differentiate. I don't think it's the Wheel, not even close. We need more games built on new models, that's what Richard Bartle is getting at.

I enjoyed WoW and even moreso AoC. I have huge respect for the evolutionary changes that will be in WAR, but I cannot help but think I'd enjoy these games even more if their core wasn't so much the damn same thing over and over. So while Keen insists that WAR != WoW, I have to say, WAR is more like WoW than it isn't.

So much time and energy is spent at Mythic and elsewhere to fix the deficiencies in the genre's basic model but the concept of changing the model is lost on people. Partly because it's not going to happen, the grind and trap of leveling up equates to pure cash and it's easier to take tried-and-true and just slap some extra fun on top.

Why not change what's broken instead of applying bandaids?

Burdens inherent to the EQ model drag down the fun factors. The MMORPG market has a lot of room to grow, but it could just as easily shrink as players feel disenfranchised because sooner or later they realize that some elements in this genre are nothing more than a dip into their wallets.

Tycho @ Penny Arcade put a similar perspective into better words, of how the entire MMORPG market is leaving him feeling dry:

It hits home the same way Richard Bartle's observations have for me, which is a paradox because Tycho's more interested in gameplay and I'm pretty sure he wouldn't find Dr. Bartle's virtual world simulation perspectives as much fun.

Tobold has an excellent definition and opinion within his blog post: Time for a New Vision.

Here's my $0.02.

Many are waving Vanguard's failure as a flag to discount 'The Vision'. I'd love to myself, I don't like the grinding aspect that nearly every MMORPG follows, but it's been too damn successful for Vanguard to tank it.

I think Blizzard fully intended to make a game avoiding this formula, their leveling grind is easier, but the endgame brings it right back into the fold. WoW started off as an excellent core game, but since then a lot of raiding content was thrown on the pile. Moreso, they've boosted the whole thing with a good heaping dose of competitive spirit between players. I've never seen a game where people are so often jealous of each other and that includes Everquest. It's all push, push, push to the top and it feels terribly linear in progression.

The worst insult an MMORPG player can be called is 'Noob'. That to me, is the essence of 'The Vision' at work.

I wonder how trapped by 'The Vision' newer MMORPGs will be. LOTRO certainly hasn't offered many new surprises, there's no paradigm shift there. Will Age of Conan or Warhammer Online avoid 'The Vision'? I think not entirely, more likely they'll chip away at individual features rather than reinvent what SOE and Blizzard have proven to be a very profitable wheel.

I'd love to see a 'New Vision' as Tobold defines it: MMORPGs with non-linear challenges, multiple goals and no clearly defined best result, yet retaining fun gameplay. I don't think that's going to happen just because one large game failed. The cynic in me says they've still got a cash cow and they'll keep milking it.