What if We Leveled Backwards?!
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Him stranding people is how warcaft 3 human campaign ended. He was human at that point but barely so. Arthus leveling backwards was how the undead in the expansion started.Clockwork Scarecrow. said:
In the game he made an unholy pilgrimage to the Lich King to gain powers from him. LK made A dawg a DK. In the expansion the Lich King was dieing and Arthus was loosing powers so had to make his way back and save him. Arthus ended up eating the Lich instead of saving him but oh well.
I actually rather quite like the idea. I always found that the most annoying thing about RPG's was the level grinding. It would be interesting to play a game where you actually try and avoid unimportant fights. It would also force you to actually get good at the game, and not just rely on your high levels. I don't think it would do well as an MMO though, but you never know.
YES PLEASE, only not as an MMO. This concept is too awesome - and too potentially story-driven - to miss out on the chance to make it the richest, bestest single-player game evar.
The 'heart-rending' part reminded me of Valkyrie Profile, also. You know, get awesome party members, then be forced to give them up willingly to progress.
The 'heart-rending' part reminded me of Valkyrie Profile, also. You know, get awesome party members, then be forced to give them up willingly to progress.
I think having all your spells at the start WoW-style would be a death knell. I know people who spectate other people playing WoW are intimidated by all my buttons, but I'm not intimidated by my buttons because you start out with 2, and gain them over time. If I started out with my UI covered in buttons I would probably turn the game off and walk away, saying "like hell if they expect me to master 100+ skills right off the bat".
The premise sounds like it would be excellent for a soul-crushingly dark and tragic game though. It just gets a little bit more hopeless every level. I can see it working well for single player, not so much an MMO though. Considering if the game tried to tell me "I know this level 85 just wiped the floor with you because you're a level 1, but that means you win!" I wouldn't buy it for a second, and it certainly wouldn't give me the same feeling of winning.
The premise sounds like it would be excellent for a soul-crushingly dark and tragic game though. It just gets a little bit more hopeless every level. I can see it working well for single player, not so much an MMO though. Considering if the game tried to tell me "I know this level 85 just wiped the floor with you because you're a level 1, but that means you win!" I wouldn't buy it for a second, and it certainly wouldn't give me the same feeling of winning.
I can't be bothered to read every post here so I'll just reiterate what has probably been said many times. This sounds like a neat idea and I think it could make for a compelling gameplay experience in a more linear Elder Scrolls type rpg. While even though I don't play MMOs I can't see it working at all in that framework. Where competition and positive achievement is the core of the gameplay. But a story driven single player campaign, it's this kind of innovation that could make Roger Ebert rethink his position IMO.
@Yahtzee; Don't you have the clout in the games industry at this point to approach a AAA studio with ideas like this?
@Yahtzee; Don't you have the clout in the games industry at this point to approach a AAA studio with ideas like this?
I think it could work. I think the player should get to choose the stats/abilities they lose. To be honest, I don't like games in which you level up; you don't win battles with skill and if you level backwards, you'll find it easy enough to fight if you have enough friends.
You're onto something here, Yahtzee. As well as making the challenge of a game more interesting, this could contribute to an RPG having more of a feeling of being an epic. One thing I liked about the first Fable game was that it took place over the course of sixty-plus years and kept track. Whenever I reached the endgame, I always felt satisfied at seeing my hero be a hardened and scarred old man who'd seen many years of combat. Unfortunately, it was always a little weird to me that as a geriatric, he was much stronger and hardier than the scrawny twig he was as a fresh Guild graduate.
I think RPGs would benefit from a combination of the status quo and your proposal. This could be accomplished by automatically having certain stats atrophy with age while increasing others, though investing in certain perks would increase or decrease the rate. With the atrophy in strength, endurance, and perception, the character would lose access to abilities with heavy melee weapons or long-range combat. With increases in intelligence and wisdom, the character would have access to greater ability with magic and use of light, precise melee weapons (katanas, rapiers, etc). Of course, they wouldn't be allowed to switch halfway, that would just be silly.
Now, some would ask why any player would bother playing anything besides a mage in that case. The mage's endurance would still be decreasing, so the most powerful mage could be killed with one strike. Also, charisma could be a skill that could increase with age for warriors, given their renown in battle. This could allow them to recruit NPCs to assist them in combat. Obviously, mages could also recruit NPCs, but not nearly as many as warriors and not as strong either (they'd basically be recruiting magic apprentices who are there to carry the inventory).
Now that's a game I'd like to see!
I think RPGs would benefit from a combination of the status quo and your proposal. This could be accomplished by automatically having certain stats atrophy with age while increasing others, though investing in certain perks would increase or decrease the rate. With the atrophy in strength, endurance, and perception, the character would lose access to abilities with heavy melee weapons or long-range combat. With increases in intelligence and wisdom, the character would have access to greater ability with magic and use of light, precise melee weapons (katanas, rapiers, etc). Of course, they wouldn't be allowed to switch halfway, that would just be silly.
Now, some would ask why any player would bother playing anything besides a mage in that case. The mage's endurance would still be decreasing, so the most powerful mage could be killed with one strike. Also, charisma could be a skill that could increase with age for warriors, given their renown in battle. This could allow them to recruit NPCs to assist them in combat. Obviously, mages could also recruit NPCs, but not nearly as many as warriors and not as strong either (they'd basically be recruiting magic apprentices who are there to carry the inventory).
Now that's a game I'd like to see!
don't know if it's been mentioned but it sounds a lot like reverse gungame on counterstrike, you start out with the really powerful guns, and then every time you get a kill, you get handed a worse one, til you end up with just a knife
don't know if that still happens though.
don't know if that still happens though.
that feeling that the end boss was lack luster could work for the story's favor by making it act like revenge isn't as sweet as you first thought.
I thought about this for an FPS, Where you start out with all the weapons and buffs, but as you level up you loose them, apart from keeping maybe one or two that you select, like an ongoing specialisation.
Then, a truely 1337 player would be the one that was running around pwning with a pop gun
I also had an idea for a game where you shoot candy instead of bullets (and have hamburgers for grenades), lose/die when you get diabetes and the fatter you get, the slower you move. I think some form of adult mind-altering substance may have been involved in that idea.
Didn't read previous posts. 13 pages? No. Just no.
Then, a truely 1337 player would be the one that was running around pwning with a pop gun
I also had an idea for a game where you shoot candy instead of bullets (and have hamburgers for grenades), lose/die when you get diabetes and the fatter you get, the slower you move. I think some form of adult mind-altering substance may have been involved in that idea.
Didn't read previous posts. 13 pages? No. Just no.
I could see it in a way, but you would have to view "levelling" in a different way. Constantly taking away people's guns and cool devices/spells/whatever would make them quit.
But if you took away their *crutches* perhaps. Imagine a generic cover-based FPS, dime-a-dozen these days. Somewhere around level 5 you lose your auto-health-regen when you're in cover. That doesn't just make the game harder it changes your whole playing strategy forcing you to become more aware of the risks of your path of action.
Another few levels later and your off-map artillery spotter is gone, instead of having regiment-level guns to rely on that automatically pound serious enemy concentrations into dust, you now have to grab a laser designator and find a safe vantage point.
But if you took away their *crutches* perhaps. Imagine a generic cover-based FPS, dime-a-dozen these days. Somewhere around level 5 you lose your auto-health-regen when you're in cover. That doesn't just make the game harder it changes your whole playing strategy forcing you to become more aware of the risks of your path of action.
Another few levels later and your off-map artillery spotter is gone, instead of having regiment-level guns to rely on that automatically pound serious enemy concentrations into dust, you now have to grab a laser designator and find a safe vantage point.
Unique Idea...too bad it wouldnt work.
Thats not to say it COULDN'T work its just that very very few companies would even attempt it when normal leveling-up is much simpler to implement and requires less time to make. You see, when attempting something new and groundbreaking would require so much time wasted in 'trial-and-error' for every stage and level of the game that even after making it work fantastically they are not guaranteed that it will be successful.
Case-in-point, Portal. Valve developed something new that they did not know how gamers would react to an fps where theres only one gun and you dont kill anybody. That is why they released it as an extra game in the orange box.
Now your idea is similar to something like Portal...Offer your idea up to Valve...who knows they might try it but its very unlikely and im afraid that you would be hard-pressed to find a big game developer to attempt that game.
The other solution is to make it yourself. Still, this is a huge risk and only a few indy games make it big time.
Thats not to say it COULDN'T work its just that very very few companies would even attempt it when normal leveling-up is much simpler to implement and requires less time to make. You see, when attempting something new and groundbreaking would require so much time wasted in 'trial-and-error' for every stage and level of the game that even after making it work fantastically they are not guaranteed that it will be successful.
Case-in-point, Portal. Valve developed something new that they did not know how gamers would react to an fps where theres only one gun and you dont kill anybody. That is why they released it as an extra game in the orange box.
Now your idea is similar to something like Portal...Offer your idea up to Valve...who knows they might try it but its very unlikely and im afraid that you would be hard-pressed to find a big game developer to attempt that game.
The other solution is to make it yourself. Still, this is a huge risk and only a few indy games make it big time.