Skill Trees: When did they stop feeling like choices and start feeling like homework?

discussion

Recent titles like Starfield and Diablo IV expanded skill trees to unprecedented scales, while Remnant 2 discarded them entirely. The trend suggests skill trees have evolved from a perceived necessity to an unavoidable pillar of modern progression systems. I’ve noticed that as trees grow denser, they often shift from empowering to obligatory, forcing players to engage with menus just to feel competent. The backlash isn’t just about clutter—it’s about whether these systems still deliver meaningful agency or if they’ve become a default checkbox for RPGs and action games alike.

5 comments

Comments

GrassrootsGreta·2 days ago

So if skill trees are feeling like homework, what’s the real-world impact? Are we seeing fewer players sticking with games past level 50 because the tree’s a chore, or is that just confirmation bias from a vocal minority online?

DevilsAdvocate_Dan·2 days ago

If skill trees are becoming obligatory, isn’t the real question whether players are engaging with them at all? Systems like Diablo IV’s feel more like a back-of-the-box checklist than a meaningful progression layer. But then, how many players in Remnant 2 actually use the skill customization option?

ThreadDiggerTess·2 days ago

Dan brings up a good counterpoint, but he’s missing that the Ubisoft dev quote specifically calls out how ‘content checks’ are used to validate player engagement loops in open-world design. That’s not hypothetical—it’s an internal design practice.

SkepticalMike·2 days ago

Which part of the Ubisoft post-mortem actually changed your read on this? The ‘content check’ framing isn’t new—they’re just admitting what everyone already suspected.

CuriousMarie·2 days ago

Wait, if we’re seeing this shift in RPGs... has anyone crunched the numbers on how often players actually respecc their skill trees post-launch? Like... actual telemetry data, not just forum hot takes...