Keep leveling out of Video Games!

#1 Posted by High-Res (271 posts) -

Am I the only one that feels putting "Leveling" in every genre of Video Game is stupid?

I totally understand Leveling in RPG's and I even accept it games like Borderlands 2, it makes perfect sense. What I can't stand is how it is now being implemented in every game and every Genre. Racing Games? Grand Theft Auto?? WTF? Battlefield? How does leveling make Battlefield a better game?

Can anyone make a valid argument for Leveling in Battlefield and how it makes it a better game? Or any Shooter for that matter?

It is my opinion that the leveling being implemented into all the genres on video games is for corporate greed. Selling Short cuts or deterring you from playing other games. How does it deter you? By spending time in other games and not staying loyal to one, you will quickly be out leveled and put at a competitive disadvantage.

I played Counter Strike Hardcore non-stop for 5+ Years, I can't stand leveling in Shooters!!!!!

#2 Edited by mastermetal777 (822 posts) -

You're not giving any arguments as to why leveling is inherently "bad" for any non-RPG genre. Regardless, leveling in shooters is fundamentally different from leveling in RPGs. In RPGs, the goal is to make yourself stronger than the enemy by boosting your abilities the more you fight. In a shooter, it allows for accessibility and better skill with certain weapons, so it essentially gives you more to choose from rather than making you stronger.

That said, when a game puts token RPG systems into its mechanics without any sort of context other than "RPG elements are cool, let's put them in the game", it does feel arbitrary. Unless the game is built around that system while also incorporating the main mechanics (take Deus Ex as a wonderful example of combining genres perfectly), then any system that feels out of place will always feel arbitrary and unnecessary.

#3 Posted by XOne_ShotX91 (151 posts) -

So you think gamers, instead of playing a wide variety of titles and splitting their time by what they like, should devote their time to a single selection? That sounds incredibly... boring as Hell. Sorry, I'll keep playing a variety of titles.

#4 Posted by mastermetal777 (822 posts) -

@xone_shotx91: I agree. I think RPG elements are good to use in a game...when done properly. I just play a game if I like it, regardless of what mechanics seem to be "wrong" in the eyes of supposed "hardcore" gamers.

#5 Edited by Archangel3371 (15269 posts) -

I really like it myself as it gives me another goal in a game to strive for whether that be to acquire better weapons or skills or even if it's simply cosmetic.

#6 Edited by turtlethetaffer (16609 posts) -

I'm surprised Lulululu has yet to make an appearance here. Also I do agree that a lot of the time leveling in other genres feels cheap; especially when it's handled like in GTAV. Leveling up felt totally irrelevant in that game. It just seemed like a useless feature to make people feel like they were progressing when really there's virtually no difference between a guy with level 50 driving and a guy with max level driving. None that I saw anyway.

#7 Edited by alim298 (1141 posts) -

Agreed. Leveling is stupid. If there's a power or ability that I need to unlock I rather unlock it through exploring or doing quests rather than gaining Xp. Dark souls is a good example of such game.

#8 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

Damn It !

You had me going until you said it makes sense in RPGs.... :(

I hate leveling up in anything.... Especially RPGs. I don't need that false sense of progression....

#9 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer

Forgive me... I was writing my last Paper today...

You know I wouldn't miss this for the world ! :)

Have faith in me....

#10 Posted by mastermetal777 (822 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: it's not false progression. It's progression on your own terms instead of the game's. Not everyone plays/levels in an RPG the same way. That's why classes exist. Yes, it's still a system invented for the game, but the more cleverly designed RPGs will allow players to master/exploit systems, much like what happens in real life.

#11 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@mastermetal777

Your progression/profeciency in games doesn't "atrophy" and "decay" like it would in Real Life... Plus its abstract and Real Life isn't abstract...and theres a bunch of other things but thats usually determined on a game by game basis.

I use that word alot.... Too much probably... I should "abstract" it. :p

#12 Edited by mastermetal777 (822 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: it doesn't decay because a game must end at the point where you're the strongest you can be.

And I question you calling a system abstract. RPGs rely on math and statistics, which are far from abstract.

And also...you keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

#13 Edited by The_Last_Ride (69792 posts) -

@High-Res: So how in the blue hell would that be possible? You do know we have trophies or achievments as kind of leveling. You don't have any solution and i have no issue with levels at all

#14 Edited by Treflis (11428 posts) -

So you're angry that people aren't playing one game but instead more then one and somehow that's because of RPG elements in games and how leveling up gives them an unfair advantage?

And Complaining about others being better then the newer crowd is coming from someone who's played Counter-strike for years?

Either you're to ignorant to see the hypocrisy in that or you're just angry cause you didn't rank in the top 3 after a Titanfall match.

#15 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@mastermetal777

Really ? Most games finish long before you reach the level cap. I think its unhealthy to keep playing after you've done all the missions just to max out the system.

Anyway I do know what abstract means but using it is very difficult for me, I'm still trying to nail down different contexts, thats why you see it everywhere.

Anyway my issue in this Scenario is that level Up Systems merely track your Progression Quantatively not Qualatively, it Checks how many times you've done something or how long you've done it, not really how good you are at doing it...

But heres the Kicker, in PvP Multiplayer games like Fighters and Shooters (assuming they are balanced like Street Fighter, and Gears) The more you play the better the Player gets, Leveling doesn't track how good you are but it is an usefull indicator of the player... Not the character.

In an RPG where the Leveling Up is alittle more than just a cosmetic badge of honor, it increases your charcters stats too, which makes the player complacent since as they're characters get "stronger" they don't require as much effort to overcome obstacles, it gets easier and easier, as a Player, you become more and more complacent since your character does all the work. As for the so called Maths and Statistics, they may be complicated but they don't provide challenge, infact Complicated is not the right word, they are "Convoluted". Its pretty clear which stats need to be boosted (for whatever class/build you want) so the game is merely navigating the complex set of rules you need to bypass to get the resources you need to level up. I don't have time for that, it doesn't benefit me, it doesn't entertain me (atleast not in the long term), it does however feed my addiction though and I certainly can't have that.

#16 Edited by mastermetal777 (822 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: if you're putting in the work of making your character level up, then that's you as the player making that happen. Not the game.

#17 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride

The problem with Level Up systems and Achievements is more ethical than practical. Its quite nice but theres a very thin line between enjoying something and being addicted to it and developers can misbehave and center their designs to be more addictive than entertaining.... After all the idea is its suppose to represent some kind of significant acomplishment (significant to video games, obviously), but more often than not they can use it unethically, like to get you to repeat something 50 million times over and over, or they can use it to get you to do something you never even wanted to do in the 1st place, they can use it to cover up flaws in the gameplay. Several developers have blogged and written articles about unethical use of certain features like Achievements, RPG Elements, Microtranactions and so on.

Anyway as the industry is now I think its safe to say that Leveling up might aswel be bad since its always used unethically, which is what I think TC is getting it at.

#18 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@mastermetal777

Yeah but the "work" that is required is tedius and is for the character's benefit, not your own, which is PARTLY why the gameplay is usually Terrible. Atleast if a non-RPG has a level up system it wants you to repeat tasks to make the player more profecient at playing the game since the character mostly remains the same.... In an RPG its the Exact opposite, the stronger the character gets the less profecient the player becomes at playing the game..... Unless you add "Level Scaling" but this defeats the purpose of leveling up (in an RPG) Role Plaing in Video Games is not about fairness or balance or even a challenge, its just Character Developement .

The issue is rather complex and difficult to explain... you should probably clear your schedule... ;)

#19 Edited by turtlethetaffer (16609 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: Oh trust me. I have faith that in any thread involving RPGs, Dark Souls or any ind of game that could potentially have co op, you will be there to throw in your two cents. I'm just saying that I'm surprised it took you this long.

#20 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@turtlethetaffer

lol. I won't be late again I swear.... My schedule is free and clear... And I shall dedicated to putting down RPGs... :) Because thats what true friends do.

#21 Edited by High-Res (271 posts) -

@High-Res: So how in the blue hell would that be possible? You do know we have trophies or achievments as kind of leveling. You don't have any solution and i have no issue with levels at all

The solution is not to have them. I loved the Trophies and stuff in one of the earlier Call of Duties, Like I dunno, killing someone with a Morty dam (I can't spell it, deal with it). Unlock them by doing things...All of my trophies and achievements have all been unlocked by naturally just playing a game. Seems leveling has nothing to do with it.

What really gets my craw is I do play a variety of games, and when I sit down on XBOX One and play Battlefield 4 I get destroyed. I am like cannon fodder for every level 50 with every gun and upgrade available as I run around with my starter guns. Where is the skill in that? Are they better than me or is their equipment better? I thought FPS were about balance.

The other thing that really grinds my gear is I don't see how leveling in a game like Battlefield makes it better. I see it as more of a deterrent than anything.

Lastly I don't think it is "Designed" to make the game better, I argue it makes it worse. It is designed to keep the player loyal to one game and deter them from putting in time into other games. AND what bothers me most is the MOST SOLD ADD ON on XBOX Live when I started thinking about this and how much it bugged me was Short Cut kits! I ALREADY SPENT A $120.00!!!!!! Now I have to play each class for 60 hours to be competitive? Or give them MORE MONEY!!?!?!?!?

I want to play and have fun, not spend MORE money or a ridiculous amount of time to be on the same level as everyone else!

I guess i could somewhat deal with it better if it wasn't for Sale!

Again, I get it, Certain games, Leveling is a fundamental key to it's design. (World of Warcraft). But first person shooters? I'm sorry, no way, I aint getting on board with that. It's dumb and designed for Micro Transactions and sheep like brand loyalty!

I think GTA Online sucks because the only reason the leveling was even put in that game is because they were selling in game money for real money and used leveling as a balance to keep someone from buying awesomeness.

#22 Edited by High-Res (271 posts) -

@Treflis: No the opposite, I feel like the leveling being forced into every game and every genre of game is making it harder for people to enjoy a variety of different games.

It is almost like if you are not 100% loyal and don't stick to one title and play just that one title religiously when you do go back to enjoy it you are at a competitive disadvantage. I think that's lame, variety is the spice of life. Again, I feel the leveling is a corporate focus group design for profits to force players to be loyal and increase micro transactions. (Purchasing Shortcuts and stuff). Reward those that play nothing but that one game, hard core, 24-7 and punish those who stray and play other titles....Or make them pony up some cash for their lack of loyalty.

In regards to Counter Strike - It does not get any more "Fair" Unless something has changed, The game begins, everyone starts with the SAME Exact amount of resources and then combat begins. One guy does not start with Body Armor, Assault Rifle and 3 other widgets while everyone else is running around with a civil war rifle. There is a huge disparity from the experienced & the novice but it is not because of abilities or equipment granted by Level!!!!

I won't even play Titan Fall because it is the most hollow, shallow $60.00 experience ever released. Tell me though, How does leveling in Titan Fall make it better? Once you are Max level are you just done and going to go trade it in?

Someone show me a case where Leveling in a genre that traditionally for 20+ Years never had the concept makes it better? How does it make a Racing Games better? How does in improve a First person Shooter?

Again, I'll give Borderlands a pass because it was designed from the ground up as a level based loot game. They didn't just create a shooter and "Shove" leveling into it!

#23 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@High-Res

Yes.... Just yes to everything you just said...

A man after my own heart ! :)

its surprizes me people don't realise how much of a problem this is... Not to mention it was actually predicted in 2010 that crap like this was going to happen.

I call it the "Virtual Skinner Box" Design.

#24 Posted by High-Res (271 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: I'm actually shocked about how many people like it! I just want one person to show me how it has improved things and made them better.

I get it, I understood when I played Ultima or Curse of The Azure Bonds on my Commodore 64 that I need to level up because the game was designed for it. It was set in stages where you needed X Amount or this and that so you didn't just start the game, go straight to the end and be done.

But it's to the point where it's getting damn near impossible to find game that does not have leveling and leveling sucks in 90% of the genres they are shoving it in.

#25 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@High-Res

Believe it or not its actually going to get worse, except this time I don't know how. Perhaps Gamasutra will write an Article predicting that too, David Wong from Cracked was actually the one who specialised in spotting these trends...

#26 Edited by lumzi32 (326 posts) -

I don't mind levelling.

I don't know how it works in modern shooters but what ever system they implemented in RSV was fantastic.

#27 Posted by Treflis (11428 posts) -

@High-Res said:

@Treflis: No the opposite, I feel like the leveling being forced into every game and every genre of game is making it harder for people to enjoy a variety of different games.

It is almost like if you are not 100% loyal and don't stick to one title and play just that one title religiously when you do go back to enjoy it you are at a competitive disadvantage. I think that's lame, variety is the spice of life. Again, I feel the leveling is a corporate focus group design for profits to force players to be loyal and increase micro transactions. (Purchasing Shortcuts and stuff). Reward those that play nothing but that one game, hard core, 24-7 and punish those who stray and play other titles....Or make them pony up some cash for their lack of loyalty.

In regards to Counter Strike - It does not get any more "Fair" Unless something has changed, The game begins, everyone starts with the SAME Exact amount of resources and then combat begins. One guy does not start with Body Armor, Assault Rifle and 3 other widgets while everyone else is running around with a civil war rifle. There is a huge disparity from the experienced & the novice but it is not because of abilities or equipment granted by Level!!!!

I won't even play Titan Fall because it is the most hollow, shallow $60.00 experience ever released. Tell me though, How does leveling in Titan Fall make it better? Once you are Max level are you just done and going to go trade it in?

Someone show me a case where Leveling in a genre that traditionally for 20+ Years never had the concept makes it better? How does it make a Racing Games better? How does in improve a First person Shooter?

Again, I'll give Borderlands a pass because it was designed from the ground up as a level based loot game. They didn't just create a shooter and "Shove" leveling into it!

I'll agree that Microtransactions and pay-to-win models are bad, Which I also suspect is the heart of this issue and not gaining new weapons and gear as you rank/Level up.

I'll also say that not every game ought to have a leveling system, but I disagree that it's bad and a horrible thing that will destroy games Since it's either used as a character progression system or a reward system for those that get better at a game.

And as far as Counter-strike goes, The whole fairness was directed at the gap between the novices and the experienced.

Many of the shooters with leveling systems tend to have implemented systems which ensures that those between say level 10-20 are playing together and so forth so to ensure there is difference in skill to make it competative yet not enough to scare people off. Counter-strike on the other hand does not and I'm certain that there are a whole lot more gamers who's been scared off counter-strike because of the gap, You can debate on if this is a good thing or not. The old " Either they just need to tough it out or go cry themselves a river" debate but to most Developers they'd rather ensure as few people as possible are scared away from their game. And there you probably got the second reason why there is a leveling/rank system in Shooters while playing online nowadays.

#28 Posted by dethtrain (384 posts) -

I always hated this. It's a cheap way to artificially extend the life of a game. Games like the new Tomb Raider, Far Cry 3 all do it wrong IMO

#29 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

I think that people that hate leveling up are specifically people who have been screwed by it....

I guess if you've never spent one million hours grinding to get something and having all that progress flushed down the toiled because of a corrupted save file or because your stupid younger brother accidentily overwrote your progress, or as in High-Res's case you get screwed over by the imbalance it causes or like me who gets addicted to it and eventually realize how stupid it is, then you probably like the idea of making numbers go up.

I guess most people believe I'm colouring my own personal terrible experience, an isolated incident, as evidence that theres something wrong with the entire concept.... And that was true for a while.... But I've grown... And realised I was right ! :) BOOOOYYYAAAAAAAAAA ! ! !

#30 Posted by High-Res (271 posts) -

@Treflis said:

@High-Res said:

@Treflis: No the opposite, I feel like the leveling being forced into every game and every genre of game is making it harder for people to enjoy a variety of different games.

It is almost like if you are not 100% loyal and don't stick to one title and play just that one title religiously when you do go back to enjoy it you are at a competitive disadvantage. I think that's lame, variety is the spice of life. Again, I feel the leveling is a corporate focus group design for profits to force players to be loyal and increase micro transactions. (Purchasing Shortcuts and stuff). Reward those that play nothing but that one game, hard core, 24-7 and punish those who stray and play other titles....Or make them pony up some cash for their lack of loyalty.

In regards to Counter Strike - It does not get any more "Fair" Unless something has changed, The game begins, everyone starts with the SAME Exact amount of resources and then combat begins. One guy does not start with Body Armor, Assault Rifle and 3 other widgets while everyone else is running around with a civil war rifle. There is a huge disparity from the experienced & the novice but it is not because of abilities or equipment granted by Level!!!!

I won't even play Titan Fall because it is the most hollow, shallow $60.00 experience ever released. Tell me though, How does leveling in Titan Fall make it better? Once you are Max level are you just done and going to go trade it in?

Someone show me a case where Leveling in a genre that traditionally for 20+ Years never had the concept makes it better? How does it make a Racing Games better? How does in improve a First person Shooter?

Again, I'll give Borderlands a pass because it was designed from the ground up as a level based loot game. They didn't just create a shooter and "Shove" leveling into it!

I'll agree that Microtransactions and pay-to-win models are bad, Which I also suspect is the heart of this issue and not gaining new weapons and gear as you rank/Level up.

I'll also say that not every game ought to have a leveling system, but I disagree that it's bad and a horrible thing that will destroy games Since it's either used as a character progression system or a reward system for those that get better at a game.

And as far as Counter-strike goes, The whole fairness was directed at the gap between the novices and the experienced.

Many of the shooters with leveling systems tend to have implemented systems which ensures that those between say level 10-20 are playing together and so forth so to ensure there is difference in skill to make it competative yet not enough to scare people off. Counter-strike on the other hand does not and I'm certain that there are a whole lot more gamers who's been scared off counter-strike because of the gap, You can debate on if this is a good thing or not. The old " Either they just need to tough it out or go cry themselves a river" debate but to most Developers they'd rather ensure as few people as possible are scared away from their game. And there you probably got the second reason why there is a leveling/rank system in Shooters while playing online nowadays.

Those are excellent points and I see them being used and executed brilliantly in World of Tanks and War Thunder. In regards to separating leveled players into appropriate groups. But due to the fact that Call of Duty does the prestige, It often puts someone who has Maxed level 6 times and is back on level 5 in with a true level 5.

So I will concede your excellent point in regards to match making and balance of skills. However, Other than the two games i mentioned, I have yet to experience this first hand on Call of Duty or Battlefield or any other game.. I often see Triple Star Generals at the top and level 5's at the bottom. If they implemented the concept you are suggesting I may even be persuaded in supporting "Leveling".

However my gut tells me that those who are supportive of the leveling concept would immediately cry foul as their huge advantages that they have gained through "Work" would be taken away.

But I'm not seeing it being handled like that at all. :( - As a matter of fact a bit of Math during matching in regards to TSP, K/D/ and a few other factors could probably do a much better job of evening out the playing field than any "Level" system.

Ultimately my argument is that Battlefield and many other games (Racing, shooters,etc) would be more enjoyable, more accessible and more "Balanced" if leveling was not forced into a genre it clearly wasn't designed for.

#31 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (9943 posts) -

@Treflis

Actually Some games have a Ranking System.... This ensures you play agains players who are evenly matched.

But most games use the level system, which doesn't necessarily reward you for playing better so much as it rewards you for playing more or playing longer, whether you're actually good at the game or not. Its quite easy to spot this design since they levels don't "Atrophy" or Drop when you suck at it.

#32 Edited by The_Last_Ride (69792 posts) -

@High-Res said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

@High-Res: So how in the blue hell would that be possible? You do know we have trophies or achievments as kind of leveling. You don't have any solution and i have no issue with levels at all

The solution is not to have them. I loved the Trophies and stuff in one of the earlier Call of Duties, Like I dunno, killing someone with a Morty dam (I can't spell it, deal with it). Unlock them by doing things...All of my trophies and achievements have all been unlocked by naturally just playing a game. Seems leveling has nothing to do with it.

What really gets my craw is I do play a variety of games, and when I sit down on XBOX One and play Battlefield 4 I get destroyed. I am like cannon fodder for every level 50 with every gun and upgrade available as I run around with my starter guns. Where is the skill in that? Are they better than me or is their equipment better? I thought FPS were about balance.

The other thing that really grinds my gear is I don't see how leveling in a game like Battlefield makes it better. I see it as more of a deterrent than anything.

Lastly I don't think it is "Designed" to make the game better, I argue it makes it worse. It is designed to keep the player loyal to one game and deter them from putting in time into other games. AND what bothers me most is the MOST SOLD ADD ON on XBOX Live when I started thinking about this and how much it bugged me was Short Cut kits! I ALREADY SPENT A $120.00!!!!!! Now I have to play each class for 60 hours to be competitive? Or give them MORE MONEY!!?!?!?!?

I want to play and have fun, not spend MORE money or a ridiculous amount of time to be on the same level as everyone else!

I guess i could somewhat deal with it better if it wasn't for Sale!

Again, I get it, Certain games, Leveling is a fundamental key to it's design. (World of Warcraft). But first person shooters? I'm sorry, no way, I aint getting on board with that. It's dumb and designed for Micro Transactions and sheep like brand loyalty!

I think GTA Online sucks because the only reason the leveling was even put in that game is because they were selling in game money for real money and used leveling as a balance to keep someone from buying awesomeness.

Leveling is just there, i just don't see how it can bother you. A lot of people actually like it. When you complain about people being higher level than you on Battlefield, they aren't better. They have the same weapons you have. They just have some perks because they have played the game and managed to unlock it. I did not have the problem as you have playing it. I still wack people online.

You don't have to give them extra money dude. Nobody is asking you anything. Games take time, and if you don't want to spend the amount of time that it requires then maybe you should play shorter games. To be honest all i see is first world problems. The game isn't unbalanced or unfair. People put time in the game get rewarded. Simple as that...

No the leveling wasn't put in there for the money. You can make money in GTA Online by doing Rooftop Rumble or other races or missions. You get money loads of ways. People that either have little time and money to spare buy the money.

All i see is entitlement in this post

#33 Edited by High-Res (271 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride: It's really more of a concern about the direction of game development post and big business putting their hooks into customers by having an impact of the development of games than an entitlement post. I can assure you of that.

I get what you saying but I played shooters for 20 years and they were all successful, retained players attention for years & years and none of them ever had leveling.

It's the WoW Effect.

You all realize that at Activision they do psychological analysis to create a formula that maximizes your thresh hold for attention? The game is then designed around that data? I.e. How long you live, how long you can go before losing interest in between living and dying? Respawn times? Rewards and kill streaks are the result of hooking wires up to ficus groups brains like lab mice?

#34 Posted by SoNin360 (5279 posts) -

I agree that some games don't need a leveling system, but I disagree with the case of online shooters, or pretty much any online game for that matter. Online games are set up for the player to strive for something, usually unlockables obtained via leveling. It's sad that microtransactions are implemented to manipulate people into buying short-cuts, but that aside, I don't have anything against leveling systems in pretty much any online game. As for single player, it only makes sense to have a leveling system pretty much just for RPGs, as you said.

#35 Posted by a55a55inx (4136 posts) -

I think a leveling system is great to have for two reasons:

1. It gives players a goal. This adds replay value to any game by requiring players to be more skilled or gain more experience before obtaining new weapons and abilities. If you give a player everything from the start, what is there to work for?

2. It provides a ton of options without overwhelming the player from the beginning. If a developer designs 30 weapons with 60 different attachments and 20 different abilities and allows a noob to choose their character with everything available, it can be very daunting. Having a ton of options is a good thing, but it's important to take a player through the game step by step.

#36 Posted by a55a55inx (4136 posts) -
@High-Res said:

Am I the only one that feels putting "Leveling" in every genre of Video Game is stupid?

I totally understand Leveling in RPG's and I even accept it games like Borderlands 2, it makes perfect sense. What I can't stand is how it is now being implemented in every game and every Genre. Racing Games? Grand Theft Auto?? WTF? Battlefield? How does leveling make Battlefield a better game?

Can anyone make a valid argument for Leveling in Battlefield and how it makes it a better game? Or any Shooter for that matter?

It is my opinion that the leveling being implemented into all the genres on video games is for corporate greed. Selling Short cuts or deterring you from playing other games. How does it deter you? By spending time in other games and not staying loyal to one, you will quickly be out leveled and put at a competitive disadvantage.

I played Counter Strike Hardcore non-stop for 5+ Years, I can't stand leveling in Shooters!!!!!

Leveling up and earning money in Counter Strike aren't that different. At first everyone starts off with a certain amount of money, allowing you to only purchase certain weapons and gear. As you continue playing you earn more money to purchase better weapons/ gear. It's the same idea, it just carries over and puts a number next to your name.

#37 Edited by The_Last_Ride (69792 posts) -

@High-Res said:

@The_Last_Ride: It's really more of a concern about the direction of game development post and big business putting their hooks into customers by having an impact of the development of games than an entitlement post. I can assure you of that.

I get what you saying but I played shooters for 20 years and they were all successful, retained players attention for years & years and none of them ever had leveling.

It's the WoW Effect.

You all realize that at Activision they do psychological analysis to create a formula that maximizes your thresh hold for attention? The game is then designed around that data? I.e. How long you live, how long you can go before losing interest in between living and dying? Respawn times? Rewards and kill streaks are the result of hooking wires up to ficus groups brains like lab mice?

Levels are there because people want them. I don't see the big deal. There are plenty of games that don't have it. Killzone for example. Sure you say games were different 20 years ago, but games evolve. RPG elements are now coming in all games because people like it and i personally don't have an issue with it. Just because COD has that type of stuff doesn't mean they are just creating the game to make you a drone to the game. They want you to pay for the game, that's it