Again, I really think you're off base on the "oh no, I have to solo all these levels now." I logged into our guild tonight to see about half the guild leveling alts with the new changes to leveling. I think those, coupled with the tuning of dungeons, you're going to see a lot more people, trust me. :)

As to the original point of the article, I have actually started to see leveling in things like Call of Duty and Quake Wars, so it actually looks like things are going the other way around.
 

I'm not saying that levels or skill gains in MMORPG don't work. But when I look at my new WoW mage, now level 18, who basically has to solo at least another 40 levels (if not 52) before having a chance to find a group for an instance, I am painfully aware of the negative consequences of a level-based game.

Again levels in general are not a problem, their consequence for the current pve design is. Levels are very important, escpecially within a multi-user environment, see the example of some FPS introducing levels right now.

What's still missed in MMOs is the total accessibility to every part of the content, unbound to levels. What does make TF2 superior to WoW is, that levels or not, i can play every single map in TF2 instantly without any grind beforehand. In WoW i am forced to play content that was particularly designed for my level bracket. Even if i enjoy mid-level content more than high-level, my level bracket dictates what to play. Levels right now limit the choice of content. This is the main problem wich has to be solved.

I dislike content in TF2, some maps just are not as well designed as others. I can chose to not play them. Valve has tools to track wich maps are popular, and wich don't, this will probably be considered in future content. In your typical MMO you can not choose wich pve-content to play and wich to skip. You're pretty much forced to jump through burning hoops. Eat your plate with the nasty vegetable stuff, to get a sweet dessert maybe. This is far from flawless game design.

Basicly we talk about a properly working mentor feature here, where levels are averaged between high- and low-level players if they want to group and content that adapts towards the level this group is tagged with than, in terms of quests, items, mobs everything. Future talk for sure, but something a lot of players would prefer to what we have now.

As to the original point of the article, I have actually started to see leveling in things like Call of Duty and Quake Wars, so it actually looks like things are going the other way around.

All those do not use levels as entry barriers for their content, they only use it as carrots for the mules that we call players. If the guy next to you is higher level, 90% of the audience of those games will try to reach him, or even outlevel him e.g. spending more time than what they would without levels, cause they can stand to be the player that isn't the one with the higher level. The moment FPS set actual "level" restrictions for their maps - just what MMOs do right now - and with this lower the choice of content, the genre will step backwards and will lose players.
 

Please Tobold, stop your witch hunt on the poor levels! :)

It's not 'levels' you've got a problem with, it's the game mechanics. Turn-based vs. twitch-based combat mechanics.

Levels/ranks/unlocks in FPSs are completely different from levels in RPGs...
 

I have actually started to see leveling in things like Call of Duty and Quake Wars, so it actually looks like things are going the other way around.



Like chrismue said I can access all of the maps and couple of game modes. After couple of levels you get access to them which takes about couple of hours. Even though you don’t have access to all the weapons/perks like a lvl 55 the margin is not like in your typical MMORPG, you can still pretty much kill them if you have the chance.

Honestly I don't mind the leveling part in the MMO, it's part of the journey unless it's my 4th Alt which just becomes a mindless grind.
 

Tobold,

Status symbols, Titles and Trophies would just be a complicated way of saying "level".

If you entered a game without a status symbol that takes months to obtain, do you think gamers who are on new and difficult challenges would invite you to assist? No levels means a total open ended game. To use WoW as an example, a leveless version would mean on day one you could choose between Deadmines, or The Black Temple. And no item drops BTW. After all that would allow a means of distinguishing level. You would just conquer the dungeons for several months, and then realize you have the same abilities and gear you originally logged on with. You would have your "title" of course. I'm betting getting invites would be judged on that title, and then you would be right back to who is at what level. :P
 

@Anselm I think Guild Wars disproves a lot of your pessimism. GW PVE comes very close to a game without levels but with lots of hard to get "cosmetic" rewards in the form of titles and pretty armour sets. One the very best things about Guild Wars is that newbies and long established players can and do play with each other on an regular basis and on an equal footing. To be honest a reputation as someone who knows how to play their character will get you an invite into a high end dungeon group a lot quicker than a shiny set of obsidan armour.
 

The one thing you need to consider though, is that having a 'level-less' game wouldn't solve the issue of new players in old games having nobody to group with.

If the game has no levels and no gear acquisition, then the only true advancement through the game is skill. Skilled players aren't going to be interested in doing easy content that they've done dozens or hundreds of times before, and a brand new player isn't going to have the skill to participate in hard content.

So either you're back to square one and old players don't want to do new player content, or you have a game where there's no difference in content from start to finish and players are bored to death within a month.

Comparing PvE MMORPG concepts to first person shooters is a bad choice. The gameplay of shooters only has lasting appeal in the pvp aspect. You don't hear about people playing Half-life 2 over and over and over, its counterstrike (pvp) that keeps shooter players entertained for months or years.
 

The symptoms:
Empty mid-level zones and difficulty finding other persons for mid-level instance runs.

But what is the cause?

It is being postulated that the concept of "level" is a cause, but I will have to point out that the concept of "level" was in place back when the mid-level zones were teeming with people and groups were easy to form.

IMO, while the concept of "level" does have various positive and negative ramifications, it is unlikely that it is the cause of the set of symptoms seen on some (few? many?) WoW servers.

I would explore other possible causes first. One possible cause that springs to mind is server population. The question is, did the target server population increase when TBC released and added considerable area to the world? If the server population remained the same, then IMO the explanation is obvious: Same number of toons are spread over more world area, resulting in a sparser feel.

Therefore, if one wants a robust population in the middle levels, one would probably want to transfer to, or roll on, a high population server, or a server that has been "recommended" for a few weeks.

Browse around on: http://www.warcraftrealms.com/census.php
It has some interesting stats on population.

Just my 2 cents...