Talk:Experience point
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Remorting
Added info on the origins of remorting. The previous explanation seems more improbable, but I left it there for the readers to decide. The act of giving away your experience does not alter the attribute of mortality, hence it seems illogical and to refer to it as remorting; it could be better described as restarting the character or such. I think that content should distinguish between these two, but I'll re-arrange the section later. Santtus 13:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Can someone clean up the reference to morts vs. imms, since imms are most definitely not a generic name for retired characters, but are, in muds, at least, the common name for administrators and staff. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.212.30.130 (talk • contribs) .
[edit] About Experience Points
Experience points has been used in a variety of games starting with D&D. As each level requires more experience points is good, but at the upper levels there are often not the needed special powers to make the upper levels worthwhile (such as beyond level 20 in D&D). Granted it has been explained that abilities are limited to prevent using abilities like motor driven gatling-guns against opponents, but there should be valuable awards at the upper levels. In real life, the rewards for being in upper levels centers around organization and command of a number of people and wealth that leads to many good things. There are many perspectives, but you would expect something very nice for reaching level 30 in D&D.
[edit] Origin of Levelling up
I removed this paragraph. "John Sanders" is not a 'famous video game champion' (no references to him exist outside of this Wikipedia article), and the fact that a phrase about 'gaining a level of experience' in an RPG originated by somebody overhearing a random comment in an arcade about 'gaining an extra life' is very unlikely. If Sanders even made that comment, he would more likely have said it after finishing a level of Super Mario Brothers, not after gaining an extra life, which has nothing to do with 'levels'. It's much more likely that the phrase simply refers to going up one level of experience. In any case, there was no citation to any of this and more than likely simply isn't true, yet other websites are already referring to this section as truth.--82.92.150.193 11:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Passive Powerlevelling
The information about passive powerlevelling is mentioned twice. The second time,
The other form involves a higher level character following a lower level character around and helping them defeat monsters either higher level than they normally could or at a much faster pace. This practice is still looked down on by some.
should probably be removed? It's also unquoted that the practise is "looked down on". -- 81.236.165.83 11:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Missing the point a bit?
What about XP as a reward system? The whole reason games, especially if you're talking about pen-and-paper RPGs, give these things out is to reward certain player behaviors. Thus, a game's reward system directly corresponds to what the game expects you to be doing. If you get XP for loot and monsters, that's a pretty clear indication you should go kill things (and, indeed, many video games nowadays try to tell a player that his target is too easy and that the game expects him to fight something else by giving him 0 XP for a kill). Old D&D giving thieves XP for gold stolen definitely rewarded stealing from NPCs and even party members. Similarly, the Vampire XP system is mostly about "gimme" points (you pretty much always get one point per category per session), so it mostly just exists to reward sitting down at the table with the group. Now, I don't want anyone to copy my rather sarcastic comment into the article body, but there should be some note of how XP in games is a way to reward certain behaviors and punish others. 130.58.235.187 09:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] “High Risk of Powerleveling Services” is advice (WTF the neutrality of the article?)
I don't know who wrote all the part of powerleveling and paid powerleveling but isn't it a little biased? Instead of describing the phenomenon, and then its critics, it's just someone giving his opinion on power leveling sucks etc.. I feel its a little unprofessional -- Laguna 117—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.135.188.245 (talk)
me too. WP:NOT a "howto guide". plus no refs so original research. i tidied it up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.31.120.254 (talk)
- WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE: Wikipedia articles should not include instructions or advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. I agree with you, although “WTF” doesn’t sound exactly polite. —TowerDragon 00:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. How do you expect anyone to care WTF you think or say when you use the term "WTF." Stupid. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.110.203.120 (talk • contribs).
[edit] What about RTS games?
Since C&C: Red Alert 2, units can become veteran and elite in rank by destroying a set value of enemies, thus increasing their stats (damage, fire rate, armour, speed, range, etc.). Is there an article about this, or should a paragraph be created in this one? (Note: Technically, C&C: Tiberian Sun had this system first, but that one didn't work very well - units rarely ranked up, because the required amount of damage to the enemy was set too high.) --80.47.210.255 19:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
