What if We Leveled Backwards?!

[FogBird]

Well, I don't really agree on this topic. I think that games won't be so fun when I don't have the getting stronger part. A good story could hold the game, but when I imagine myself playing a game like this, I feel it is just not fun, and having fun is my main goal when playing.
Advancing in the game will just make me more miserable, removing elements all the time, even if the designers add new elements in the story and gameplay and such.
But hey, maybe I'm just special. That's just what I think.

 

[Alphakirby]

Wow, after reading through the article, I have to say...This just might be crazy enough to work!

 

[Tarkand]

The main problem with the concept is that as you lose abilities, the game will become more and more 'same-y' and boring.

Unless the game developers grow brains and try to put more variety into the game than just "what flavours of attack you can use".

And how do you propose you do that? The core concept of Yahtzee's game is that as you level, you get weaker and loose abilities. No matter how deep the game is, you are still looking at a game that is getting shallower as it progress... it may not be totally shallow by the end game, but it will be shallower. There's no getting around it. Which also means not as fun to many people.

The fact is simple - pretty much every game, be it a fps, rpg, action game, etc - starts with you having less abilities and possibilities and gaining more.

The games gets easier either because:
A - The difficulty doesn't scale properly, so your new abilities make it too easy.
B - You've figured out some new combo that is much more powerful, so even if the game does scale, you're still destroying everything regardless.
C - A mix of both.

In both case the problem has more to do with poor design (poor level scaling or not playtesting all the combo properly) - this is just a very round about way to fix the problem... and it opens up a can of worm.

 

[Dice Warwick]

interesting idea, but may not be my cup of tea, but a good basic idea to work from.

 

[Tzfanya]

Yahtzee, you say a lot of things, most of which I nod appreciatively at or smirk knowingly along with. This, however, is a stroke of absolute bloody genius.

Couple of other scenarios that would work as vessels for the concept: someone with some wasting disease that slowly atrophies them over the course of the game, or alternately this mirrors something I'd been thinking of off the back of District 9: a game where you start off as a gun-toting soldier, but slowly transform into a monster, losing the ability to use your guns but gaining less direct skills that, utilised with more thought, lend you the ability to accomplish your tasks.

 

[Stammer]

lol even if it didn't make perfect sense the way you brought it up Yahtzee, this is something my friend and I have been talking about for a while.

One thing you forgot to mention is how this could affect shooters (which is what my friend and I were discussing about primarily). Especially since shooter games are mostly about "skill" rather than your combat gear, in games like Call of Duty when you progress through multiplayer chances are you're becoming exponentially better than people just starting out. If a shooter game has been live for even as much as a week, it's pretty much pointless to get into it these days because everyone who already owns the game is going to already be 100x better than you, sniping you as you spawn with the combined awesomeness of their advanced twitch reflexes and their new railgun that you can only unlock once you've reached Lv.50 War Veteran level.

If shooters started you out with all of those awesome weapons and upgrades and then slowly took them away, it would give newcomers a chance to keep up with the players who have become naturally skilled at the game.

Spoiler

Oh yeah, and I was one of those dunces that once said "First!" on one of your videos... but that was when I was brand-new to the forums and I literally thought that it was the "cool thing to do". Plus, when I did it I actually did comment on the video itself (yes, I did watch it before saying "First"). I was banned for a week and now I understand why. But what I still fail to understand is why I was banned for having a post with content while everyone else on the first two pages who only commented on my "First" comment weren't banned. Oh well, it's a mistake I'll never make again. lol

 

[Baneling Aspect]

Extra Punctuation: What if We Leveled Backwards?!

Yahtzee's crazy idea for RPGs that might actually work.

Read Full Article

Wow, that's certainly clever. I don't know if I would want to play an MMO made out of the concept, but I would definitely give a singleplayer and/or co-op RPG like this a whirl. Sounds like it could be a really engaging experience.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I can't see this working in MMORPGs, seeing as so many players level different classes/races just to try out their abilities. That takes time, and brings more money in for the publisher.

It's an excellent idea for single-player games, if implemented correctly. A nicer idea might be a direct correlation between your abilities and your health. You can either use a dizzying array of interesting powers at the increased risk of dying, or power through with a relatively bland skill-set.

 

[retterkl]

Although not really the same as what Yahtzee was aiming at, I had some thought of something like this.

Basically we all know it's really easy to reach max level in an MMO simply by grinding and you can die as many times as you like without having much consequence (there's some like lost loot or buffs) however there's no real fear of death.

I was thinking that to spice up Endgame a little you would lose Exp every time you die. This would be set on a multiplier so that mabye first time you die you lose 500 exp, then when you die a second time you lose 3x as much, so 1500 exp, then 4500 exp and so on. This would be set on a cooldown timer of mabye an hour or so. This would leave people to actually put some thought into their game, mabye join up as a team and keep healthy and grinding wouldn't be so grindy with a fear of death.

This would only start when you reach something like level 60 out of a game where you can reach level 80, and the maximum you can drop down to is level 60 (you would lose skills in the same arc that you develop them). The exp that gets taken away would be based on a % of how much that level takes (say 5%, so for a level that takes 50000 Exp you would start by losing 2500 exp on your first death, 7500 exp on your next, 22500... 67500... after that you're screwing your levels over by continuing).

The % would then increase as you reach closer to maximum level so it's even more difficult (i.e. you lose 50% by level 79 so 2 deaths and you're just over level 78!!) and you have greater fear of death.



This would hope to get rid of a bunch of those top level dudes who spend way too much time grinding, and it would give the game a new flavour for those bored at endgame.



So basically in common with Yahtzee's proposal, it's kind of when you get to a high level you still have the potential to lose it and go backwards, but you're not going to lose it all, and you also have to gain it first. It would be nice too because it gives you a chance to go back and remodel your character arc in a different way.

 

[ModReap]

Huh this is actually pretty good.

I immediately thought of a game where the main character is inflicted with a curse, from something right before an opposing force aims to take over. The longer you fight the weaker you become, and if you fight to long then it's game over.

 

[browncoat619]

I think Yahtzee's finally gone mad with power

 

[2-part Epoxy]

I had an idea like that a while ago. It was a daydream about a game in which you play a homeless beggar.

The point of the game would be to collect money by panhandling around a city. Your character would start as a down-on-your-luck but otherwise healthy adult. However, the more time you spend on the streets, the more your health deteriorates. And the more crippled you become, the more money you can get from panhandling!

You would be able to fight with citizens or fellow vagrants for supplies, tools, or rattier-looking clothes. But the real purpose of combat would be to sustain serious injury. By surviving many severe beatings, you would eventually progress from a mere bum to a blind, toothless, hobbling and pathetic paragon! But such handicaps would increase the real danger: collapsing of malnutrition and/or getting nabbed by the police. If they catch you they will take you to the hospital. There, doctors will not only heal you, they will take your hard-earned begging money!



Well... that's one (incredibly stupid and probably insulting) way to integrate the mechanic with the story. But seriously, I think Yahtzee has an interesting idea. As mentioned before, some games give you a real shock when they suddenly deprive you of a previously-important item, weapon or ability. A game in which the player knew that such loss was inevitable would be... maybe frustrating, but maybe really engaging (especially if she had to choose what to sacrifice).

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I must say I quite agree with these ideas getting implemented in RPG games.

The difficulty curve in most RPG games decays to a mere null towards the end of the game,where you don't even need to pop potions to keep yourself alive,because you are overpowered with all your gear,spells and abilities.

Will be nice to see some producers try this "tactic" in future RPG's.

Guess time will tell...

 

[SeiichiSin]

I seriously have a working story already in mind. I have an idea on how it would work. Though it wouldn't "end" with you being weak, that would be part one of the game. Though part two would technically not be nearly as long as part 1 as it wouldn't be the main idea. I dunno if you would give me a second look, but I am a game designer of sorts myself, and I am actually sorta interested in the idea. If you wanna get in contact about it, hit me up. If not, the idea is yours, I'm not going to touch it without the mastermind backing me up.

 

[mireko]

BOY HOWDY this sounds like a an amazing idea.

I LOVE PLAYING CHARACTERS WITH AIDS.

 

[qeinar]

would never work for an mmo tbh. as for a singleplayer or co-op rpg it could be in a comedic based game, but i don't really see the idea working. as for the spells you don't use in wow on your mage, remember that there are circustancial spells that will be usefull for situations, and also they have specs where you can choose ice, rendering your fire spells weaker than your ice spells. so it's not like wow do not let you choose what spells you use. and also there would be no point in removing the spells you don't use since this would not really make you weaker.

the thing about removing spells is that having 2-3 spells does not really take much skill to use, it limits your choices rendering the game easier. what they need to learn is making boss fights harder, not making the player bader. : p

 

[Nevrus02]

I go to school in Burlington, VT. for Game Design. A team two years ago actually created a game along these lines called "The Eve" that begins with the final boss fight, and then the player must slowly sacrifice their abilities in order to get closer to their love. The levels were themed on the pitfalls of relationships- Pride, Jealousy, Lust, and I believe Deceit. The player chooses an ability- double jump, shield, attacking, and crawling- to sacrifice at the end of each level. They can also end the game early by sacrificing their love so that their love can be free of the curse you're working so hard to undo.

The concept was brilliant, as each sacrificed ability cut off many easier paths in each level. I feel like it's proof of concept for this kind of play.

Stay bastardly, Yahtzee!

 

[RA92]

As a concept for a Single Player game, this is kinda interesting though, imo, kinda gimmicky.

Playing Fallout 3, I'll disagree with the 'gimmicky' statement.

Let me explicate. When I started off from the lower levels, every decision I made had an appreciable effect on the outcome of my battles, NPC interactions, etc. Because resources were so scarce, I had to decide whether taking on a certain group of raiders was commendable; and even if they could be defeated, I had to consider whether it was worth the effort considering scarcity, for example whether I should use the long range rifle since I was short on 5.56mm ammo while the raiders were mostly armed with 10mm. Getting shot would cost me expensive Stimpacks (didn't have a place to sleep yet) and degrade my armor, which would cost me further resources. Even in battles I had to hunt out vantage points to attack from, not to mention stealth.

The game had me thinking in terms of logistics, both in resource management and combat.

But later, with the reward mechanism at work (Tesla Armor, Laser Rifle, Plasma Rifle, around 1000 Microfusion Cells harvested from decapitated Enclave soldiers), the gameplay degraded for me. Every problem encountered simply met my chain-gun and a river of lead. The tension was no longer there, and neither was the challenge.

So it does have the possibility to create an interesting gameplay mechanism, not to mention the aesthetic appeal of the narrative. Also, I would like to point at zjspeed's comment.

The reverse-leveling mechanic would be easier to implement as a linear single player or cooperative multiplayer game.

Explain and understand it simply as scarcity. Ammunition and other supplies become more and more rare and valuable as the story progresses.

I think Left 4 Dead does this on a small scale.


Your team starts a level with four healthy survivors loaded up with weapons, ammunition, and medical supplies.

During the sprint to the next safe house, you expend grenades, bullets, pills, first aid packs, health (mobility), and team members.

It wouldn't be hard to imagine a game using a similar mechanic over longer time scales.

But yeah, it wouldn't work in an MMORPG. MMO devs are too busy bleeding from the eyes from all the cocaine they're inhaling, courtesy to Skinner's Box.

 

[qeinar]

As a concept for a Single Player game, this is kinda interesting though, imo, kinda gimmicky.

Playing Fallout 3, I'll disagree with the 'gimmicky' statement.

Let me explicate. When I started off from the lower levels, every decision I made had an appreciable effect on the outcome of my battles, NPC interactions, etc. Because resources were so scarce, I had to decide whether taking on a certain group of raiders was commendable; and even if they could be defeated, I had to consider whether it was worth the effort considering scarcity, for example whether I should use the long range rifle since I was short on 5.56mm ammo while the raiders were mostly armed with 10mm. Getting shot would cost me expensive Stimpacks (didn't have a place to sleep yet) and degrade my armor, which would cost me further resources. Even in battles I had to hunt out vantage points to attack from, not to mention stealth.

The game had me thinking in terms of logistics, both in resource management and combat.

But later, with the reward mechanism at work (Tesla Armor, Laser Rifle, Plasma Rifle, around 1000 Microfusion Cells harvested from decapitated Enclave soldiers), the gameplay degraded for me. Every problem encountered simply met my chain-gun and a river of lead. The tension was no longer there, and neither was the challenge.

So it does have the possibility to create an interesting gameplay mechanism, not to mention the aesthetic appeal of the narrative. Also, I would like to point at zjspeed's comment.

The reverse-leveling mechanic would be easier to implement as a linear single player or cooperative multiplayer game.

Explain and understand it simply as scarcity. Ammunition and other supplies become more and more rare and valuable as the story progresses.

I think Left 4 Dead does this on a small scale.


Your team starts a level with four healthy survivors loaded up with weapons, ammunition, and medical supplies.

During the sprint to the next safe house, you expend grenades, bullets, pills, first aid packs, health (mobility), and team members.

It wouldn't be hard to imagine a game using a similar mechanic over longer time scales.

But yeah, it wouldn't work in an MMORPG. MMO devs are too busy bleeding from the eyes from all the cocaine they're inhaling, courtesy to Skinner's Box.

well the problem is they failed to make the endgame harder in fallout, they should make mobs that needed good tactics to kill and would not drop fast from guns. actually the game could just make the mobs of the game stronger as time goes by..

 

[Julien Brightside]

What if a character that is aging have to find potions or magical artifacts that counteracts the aging to a certain dregree, but perhaps with a price of morality, and even pieces of your soul?


A game about Spartacus could manage this I guess. You start with a certain amount of people beneath you as a general, but the more battles you take part in, the more wounded and tired they get.