Hello there. I've been thinking about this topic, maybe because I've seen too many games I liked suffer because of it (inc. our beloved FireFall, most sadly). I guess you have seen it happen too because, regrettably, it's a very common occurrence esp. regarding massive multiplayer games (for the purpose of this topic, let's set aside the possible semantic conflicts and include Ember in this category).
Yes, I'm talking about 'power creep': let's define it as 'what happens when content you run in the earlier/middle stages stops being attractive and therefore ends up being forgotten'.
When 99.9% of your playtime in your Ember-life is confined to 5% or less of everything the game has to offer then it's bad and the game has a very low 'return' (in terms of enjoyment hours) for the production efforts, and I'd say any developer should spare no creative energy and adequate planning (and later evaluation) in order to actively fight against this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before going any further, we need to clarify something: if there's going to be ANY kind of player 'material' progression (like developing your frames or vehicle/base building, this does NOT mean 'traditional leveling', by the way) then there MUST be vertical progression. It's inevitable.
Now, I know what you're thinking, my dear Ares pilots: 'but they said progression is going to be mostly horizontal, like 'unlocking' different 'flavors' for your frames/vehicles and gear which are optional and not necessarily a lot better'. Let me tell you now what will happen under that strict scheme so you realize the consequences are always detrimental to the game.
- a) Redundancy and lack of real impact. If all content is doable with 'stock' equipment (pure horizontal prog.) then there's no reason whatsoever to upgrade and to having long term 'material' goals other than 'I want to try that rainbow shooting gun because it looks awesome'. It's a big hit to player motivation and to the game's retaining power. Once you have the 'rainbow gun' you will feel kind of dumb because it really does nothing the good ol' stock weapon couldn't do and in the end the difference isn't really'impactful' but merely 'aesthetic'. 'Yeah, it was fun for like 2 hours'.
'We could make the 'grind' very light then, to compensate for the lack of 'attractiveness'... well, that's the quick band-aid but to me it sounds more like 'we don't care about our game staying power at all'. This is the extreme, but please notice that 'Ok, it will be MOSTLY horizontal with only a little vertical' would still fall into the same 'redundancy trap' only to a slightly lesser degree.
OR
- b) No 'material' progression at all and everything available at any time. That means no gearing, no economy/crafting and no sense of achievement other than practice and skill related. In other words, it means the refusal of many aspects and just 'let's be a plain shooter'. Lack of ambition and a very narrow, limited scope.
That's basically what 'horizontal progression' means and if you know a way to prevent it and still stick to 'horizontal', please do tell.
Note that when I say 'gear' and 'material progression', it includes any form this could take (from guns, vehicles, base assets, etc.).
Now, some may say 'but the idea is that you gather resources to build a tank and then that tank allows you to fight the next bad guys'. Let me tell you that IS vertical progression, or if you want to look at it in another way, then you could call it 'content unlocking requisite' but it's pointless to make the difference because both things mean and achieve the same thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know many of you have a negative idea concerning 'vertical' but that's because you've seen the ill effects of power creep: making content obsolete and also getting the worst out of the players in the social and personal levels. Let me tell you that's solely because of wrong implementation and it's not a logical inevitability. Not to sound pretentious but the norm out there is devs do it wrong OR devs do it to serve their monetary agenda in detriment of their game because it still works and as long as $ keeps flowing then who cares and who's to say what's good and what's bad after all?
Be with me on this and let's state the fact the gaming industry is in poor shape and if it's true it works economically, if you have even a slight sense of criticism and a healthy dose of imagination and analysis (and a larger dose of ambition and hope for a change) then we can safely agree that 'the gaming industry is full of sterile formulas and conceptual atrocities'.
But this can change, not because of corporate machinations (those drones will always fail in the end), but because of independent thinkers and passionate creatives. I want to believe this game has what it takes, and experienced and motivated visionary in charge. Firefall's history showed me this (this is personal perception and off topic, feel free to disagree but what are you doing here if you think that's not true?).
'Ok then, that's nice and all but where you going with this?'.
Here: SCALING and REWARD to keep content relevant, game diverse and players happy. Vertical progression can be free of power creep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* SCALING *
Summarizing some conditions: There will be no (cow) levels. There will be vertical progression (upgrades will add diversity, flavor, AND power).
What's the story then?
I'll set an example.
This pilot here has 'end game' equipment, he can tackle all content the game has to offer and his personal armory has many 'unlocks', different 'grade' gear and multiple options within each tier (yes, note how 'tier' is related to vertical prog.).
Wouldn't he crush earlier game content and commit the sin of 'power creep'? No. You see, this (early) area has a 'low energy grid', that means his top of the line equips don't work here, those guns can't fire and those shields won't power up. He must visit his armory and pick up a gear set-up appropriate for this area. Luckily, the 'lower tier' of hardware still has some respectable degree of variety (because he 'grinded' the lower bracket to expand it horizontally) allowing for customization and really doesn't feel like 'I went to the low area and I can't use any cool toys at all'.
That's right soldier, you wanted to go to the lower area and so you must outfit for the task at hand.
In my opinion, this is much easier to balance and adds a lot to gameplay variety compared to the most flat approach of 'let's just nerf his numbers and let him keep the same set-up'. Not only lower content, but also lower GEAR stays relevant through the whole game if the player so desires. If the palette is colorful enough then 'low level' is as enjoyable as 'end game', for some at least and the result is greater than the sum of its parts because we must take into consideration the strong beneficial effect it has on playerbase integration.
Does this mean we'll be forced to replay those 'low level' areas too? No. I don't believe in 'forcing' anything on anyone, I believe in 'options to break the routine' and attractive variety.
In FireFall (1.3) you 'could' go low area (farm carbon) but scaling was atrocious (too easy) and it was a really boring activity w.o much else to choose from. Really poor implementation.
This, my friends, is intended to demonstrate a healthy harmonic integration of vertical + horizontal growth is not only possible, but the way to go, IMHO.
The difference between a veteran and a starter is about experience and proficiency but never in 'numbers power'. High 'level' pilots are a welcome addition in the early/middle areas and not there to troll and ruin the party. Make it so enemies can simulate tactics to some extent, have multiple 'pressure points' and not even the most experienced guys should be able to 'effortlessly cheese the fight' for everybody else. Please don't think about 'frustrating difficulty'. Think wider. See it solely as 'fair but still somewhat challenging, well conceived encounter design'. Of course, it will always be easier the more good/advanced players are around, but still I believe 'challenge' is not an abstract concept and I'm convinced it can be shaped with an acceptable degree of precision if devs believe in it and are not afraid of empirical tests and corrections. Simulation, projection, observation, analysis and calculations, estimation, testing and correction. A good dev's tools. Time: sadly a luxury.
That leads to the second point:
* REWARD *
Everything falls to pieces if there's no other motivation for players to 'downlevel themselves' other than to break the monotony or meet some social schedule. Everything fails if the journey feels arbitrarily and unnecesarily restrictive or purposeless.
Let's illustrate it with a little scene.
'We need to harvest those crystals and bring them back so we can produce power cells for our 'Megabolt cannon' there at the hottest zone in dispute. The bad guys have a Behemoth en-route, according to scout's intel, and we're gonna need to fire our big gun at least twice to break his defenses and give our troops and vehicles a fighting chance'.
'Main deposits in range for our convoys to make it in time are located here (nearby) and here (bit far away, near the 'lower level' base)'.
- Pilot A: 'Hey, me and my squad of ultimate bad asses can help those guys here at the front line ('high level area'). I just got this puppy (looks proudly at his newest acquisition, the high power particle beam phalanx)... bring 'em on!'.
- Pilot B: 'Keep your panties on! Look, they have three heavies, two snipers and a saboteur. If we want to help there we could use a medic for the troops and an engineer for vehicle and turret support. It will definitely make life easier'.
- Pilot C: 'Well, I suppose it's gonna be on me to try keep your asses alive... just like old times'.
*switches to medical frame*
- Pilot D: 'I'll handle the toys, gentlemen'.
*switches to technician frame*
- Pilot E: (consults tactical situation map) 'Looks like there's only a few pilots there at Outpost 27 (farther, secondary crystal deposit, 'lower level' area). Opposition is light but the convoy has a long way ahead, timing is gonna be tight and the road between here and there is suspiciously silent'.
- Pilot F: 'An ambush?'.
- Pilot E: 'I don't know but we shouldn't take any chances. We better get moving. That convoy must make it here or we all doomed'.
- Pilot F: 'Energy grid near 27 is at 15%. Operating on auxiliary power. Main reactor took heavy damage after last attack. Still undergoing repairs. No energy weapons, and only class 2 shields it seems'.
- Pilot E: 'Looks like we're going the old-fashioned way'.
*puts plasma cannon in the weapon rack, picks up the lower tech ballistic minigun*
- Pilot F: 'Let's roll!'
*both pilots jump on the lightweight all terrain vehicle and head to Outpost 27*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As you see, if you got this far, the idea is this:
'Advanced' player would have progressed 'materially' (vertically) but he can play ANY content he desires at any time as long as it suits his goals. Fun factor and motivation for low level areas do not necessarily decrease as the player advances.
'Starter' players are somewhat restricted at the beginning but that's fine because 'lower' encounters are aimed towards a gentle and non-pushy learning process (keep in mind you still should try to shoot straight! No matter who you are, enemies do fight back, and they bite!).
Most if not all of content in game stays relevant (including low tier gear). Players feel more connected to the whole playerbase and have freedom of choice and own pace instead of obnoxious and castrating hermetic 'end game only' and 'deserted starter areas'.
Thank you for reading. Let me know what you think. And no, there's not a TL;DR version.
Yes, I'm talking about 'power creep': let's define it as 'what happens when content you run in the earlier/middle stages stops being attractive and therefore ends up being forgotten'.
When 99.9% of your playtime in your Ember-life is confined to 5% or less of everything the game has to offer then it's bad and the game has a very low 'return' (in terms of enjoyment hours) for the production efforts, and I'd say any developer should spare no creative energy and adequate planning (and later evaluation) in order to actively fight against this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before going any further, we need to clarify something: if there's going to be ANY kind of player 'material' progression (like developing your frames or vehicle/base building, this does NOT mean 'traditional leveling', by the way) then there MUST be vertical progression. It's inevitable.
Now, I know what you're thinking, my dear Ares pilots: 'but they said progression is going to be mostly horizontal, like 'unlocking' different 'flavors' for your frames/vehicles and gear which are optional and not necessarily a lot better'. Let me tell you now what will happen under that strict scheme so you realize the consequences are always detrimental to the game.
- a) Redundancy and lack of real impact. If all content is doable with 'stock' equipment (pure horizontal prog.) then there's no reason whatsoever to upgrade and to having long term 'material' goals other than 'I want to try that rainbow shooting gun because it looks awesome'. It's a big hit to player motivation and to the game's retaining power. Once you have the 'rainbow gun' you will feel kind of dumb because it really does nothing the good ol' stock weapon couldn't do and in the end the difference isn't really'impactful' but merely 'aesthetic'. 'Yeah, it was fun for like 2 hours'.
'We could make the 'grind' very light then, to compensate for the lack of 'attractiveness'... well, that's the quick band-aid but to me it sounds more like 'we don't care about our game staying power at all'. This is the extreme, but please notice that 'Ok, it will be MOSTLY horizontal with only a little vertical' would still fall into the same 'redundancy trap' only to a slightly lesser degree.
OR
- b) No 'material' progression at all and everything available at any time. That means no gearing, no economy/crafting and no sense of achievement other than practice and skill related. In other words, it means the refusal of many aspects and just 'let's be a plain shooter'. Lack of ambition and a very narrow, limited scope.
That's basically what 'horizontal progression' means and if you know a way to prevent it and still stick to 'horizontal', please do tell.
Note that when I say 'gear' and 'material progression', it includes any form this could take (from guns, vehicles, base assets, etc.).
Now, some may say 'but the idea is that you gather resources to build a tank and then that tank allows you to fight the next bad guys'. Let me tell you that IS vertical progression, or if you want to look at it in another way, then you could call it 'content unlocking requisite' but it's pointless to make the difference because both things mean and achieve the same thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know many of you have a negative idea concerning 'vertical' but that's because you've seen the ill effects of power creep: making content obsolete and also getting the worst out of the players in the social and personal levels. Let me tell you that's solely because of wrong implementation and it's not a logical inevitability. Not to sound pretentious but the norm out there is devs do it wrong OR devs do it to serve their monetary agenda in detriment of their game because it still works and as long as $ keeps flowing then who cares and who's to say what's good and what's bad after all?
Be with me on this and let's state the fact the gaming industry is in poor shape and if it's true it works economically, if you have even a slight sense of criticism and a healthy dose of imagination and analysis (and a larger dose of ambition and hope for a change) then we can safely agree that 'the gaming industry is full of sterile formulas and conceptual atrocities'.
But this can change, not because of corporate machinations (those drones will always fail in the end), but because of independent thinkers and passionate creatives. I want to believe this game has what it takes, and experienced and motivated visionary in charge. Firefall's history showed me this (this is personal perception and off topic, feel free to disagree but what are you doing here if you think that's not true?).
'Ok then, that's nice and all but where you going with this?'.
Here: SCALING and REWARD to keep content relevant, game diverse and players happy. Vertical progression can be free of power creep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* SCALING *
Summarizing some conditions: There will be no (cow) levels. There will be vertical progression (upgrades will add diversity, flavor, AND power).
What's the story then?
I'll set an example.
This pilot here has 'end game' equipment, he can tackle all content the game has to offer and his personal armory has many 'unlocks', different 'grade' gear and multiple options within each tier (yes, note how 'tier' is related to vertical prog.).
Wouldn't he crush earlier game content and commit the sin of 'power creep'? No. You see, this (early) area has a 'low energy grid', that means his top of the line equips don't work here, those guns can't fire and those shields won't power up. He must visit his armory and pick up a gear set-up appropriate for this area. Luckily, the 'lower tier' of hardware still has some respectable degree of variety (because he 'grinded' the lower bracket to expand it horizontally) allowing for customization and really doesn't feel like 'I went to the low area and I can't use any cool toys at all'.
That's right soldier, you wanted to go to the lower area and so you must outfit for the task at hand.
In my opinion, this is much easier to balance and adds a lot to gameplay variety compared to the most flat approach of 'let's just nerf his numbers and let him keep the same set-up'. Not only lower content, but also lower GEAR stays relevant through the whole game if the player so desires. If the palette is colorful enough then 'low level' is as enjoyable as 'end game', for some at least and the result is greater than the sum of its parts because we must take into consideration the strong beneficial effect it has on playerbase integration.
Does this mean we'll be forced to replay those 'low level' areas too? No. I don't believe in 'forcing' anything on anyone, I believe in 'options to break the routine' and attractive variety.
In FireFall (1.3) you 'could' go low area (farm carbon) but scaling was atrocious (too easy) and it was a really boring activity w.o much else to choose from. Really poor implementation.
This, my friends, is intended to demonstrate a healthy harmonic integration of vertical + horizontal growth is not only possible, but the way to go, IMHO.
The difference between a veteran and a starter is about experience and proficiency but never in 'numbers power'. High 'level' pilots are a welcome addition in the early/middle areas and not there to troll and ruin the party. Make it so enemies can simulate tactics to some extent, have multiple 'pressure points' and not even the most experienced guys should be able to 'effortlessly cheese the fight' for everybody else. Please don't think about 'frustrating difficulty'. Think wider. See it solely as 'fair but still somewhat challenging, well conceived encounter design'. Of course, it will always be easier the more good/advanced players are around, but still I believe 'challenge' is not an abstract concept and I'm convinced it can be shaped with an acceptable degree of precision if devs believe in it and are not afraid of empirical tests and corrections. Simulation, projection, observation, analysis and calculations, estimation, testing and correction. A good dev's tools. Time: sadly a luxury.
That leads to the second point:
* REWARD *
Everything falls to pieces if there's no other motivation for players to 'downlevel themselves' other than to break the monotony or meet some social schedule. Everything fails if the journey feels arbitrarily and unnecesarily restrictive or purposeless.
Let's illustrate it with a little scene.
'We need to harvest those crystals and bring them back so we can produce power cells for our 'Megabolt cannon' there at the hottest zone in dispute. The bad guys have a Behemoth en-route, according to scout's intel, and we're gonna need to fire our big gun at least twice to break his defenses and give our troops and vehicles a fighting chance'.
'Main deposits in range for our convoys to make it in time are located here (nearby) and here (bit far away, near the 'lower level' base)'.
- Pilot A: 'Hey, me and my squad of ultimate bad asses can help those guys here at the front line ('high level area'). I just got this puppy (looks proudly at his newest acquisition, the high power particle beam phalanx)... bring 'em on!'.
- Pilot B: 'Keep your panties on! Look, they have three heavies, two snipers and a saboteur. If we want to help there we could use a medic for the troops and an engineer for vehicle and turret support. It will definitely make life easier'.
- Pilot C: 'Well, I suppose it's gonna be on me to try keep your asses alive... just like old times'.
*switches to medical frame*
- Pilot D: 'I'll handle the toys, gentlemen'.
*switches to technician frame*
- Pilot E: (consults tactical situation map) 'Looks like there's only a few pilots there at Outpost 27 (farther, secondary crystal deposit, 'lower level' area). Opposition is light but the convoy has a long way ahead, timing is gonna be tight and the road between here and there is suspiciously silent'.
- Pilot F: 'An ambush?'.
- Pilot E: 'I don't know but we shouldn't take any chances. We better get moving. That convoy must make it here or we all doomed'.
- Pilot F: 'Energy grid near 27 is at 15%. Operating on auxiliary power. Main reactor took heavy damage after last attack. Still undergoing repairs. No energy weapons, and only class 2 shields it seems'.
- Pilot E: 'Looks like we're going the old-fashioned way'.
*puts plasma cannon in the weapon rack, picks up the lower tech ballistic minigun*
- Pilot F: 'Let's roll!'
*both pilots jump on the lightweight all terrain vehicle and head to Outpost 27*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As you see, if you got this far, the idea is this:
'Advanced' player would have progressed 'materially' (vertically) but he can play ANY content he desires at any time as long as it suits his goals. Fun factor and motivation for low level areas do not necessarily decrease as the player advances.
'Starter' players are somewhat restricted at the beginning but that's fine because 'lower' encounters are aimed towards a gentle and non-pushy learning process (keep in mind you still should try to shoot straight! No matter who you are, enemies do fight back, and they bite!).
Most if not all of content in game stays relevant (including low tier gear). Players feel more connected to the whole playerbase and have freedom of choice and own pace instead of obnoxious and castrating hermetic 'end game only' and 'deserted starter areas'.
Thank you for reading. Let me know what you think. And no, there's not a TL;DR version.
Likes:
Aphaz and Daynen
