On the subject of end game content......... When I look at an MMO I feel as if there is no end to the game. Does endgame content mean max level hardest difficulty stuff? GW2 will certainly have that with its dungeons and huge dragon battles. Those game demos you have seen on youtube that were of battles of those bosses were close to endgame. The people playing at the conventions were playing with level 60s to take on these bosses. A level 1 character could probably join in the fight but would be useless since he/she would have low health, lack of skills and traits, and armor values.
Leveling is just a good tie-in to stats and skills. You dont want a low level character learning a powerful skill until he has reached a more appropriate level. You want that sense of "Im getting stronger" feeling and leveling is like a marker of how strong you are.
Levels havn't been brag rights in a MMO since Lineage. It is just too easy to level up in MMOs today. You might impress someone who just logged on the first time but it is gear and titles that is the real bragging right. Wait until the first player on your server gets her obsidian armor, you wont hear the end of it until you got one yourself.
Levels have 2 functions in modern MMOs: They give you a hint about how powerful you are against another player or a mob and they simulate that your character is getting more experienced the first few weeks you play.
Hey, they are still brag rights, or lead up to them (Obsidian armour, as you have said). They simply sperate players from other players, now while you may not be saying it outloud, but you will always compare the lvl 35 to the lvl 1 in you head. It is natural, as is the pride of hitting that "supah high level", and compare yourself to everyone else you pass. It is bragging rights. How easy it is depends on the person. Quite frankly, I don't view "level" as experience, especially in this type of game. In GW HoH, people constantly asked to show you rank, and me having 2 gw accounts, would often be forced to switch even though I've had experience (which I couldn't prove) and was rather good at. Versus Mobs again depends on skill in this game. In a video (total biscuit) I remember him taking on 4 or 5 lvl 3 people while he himself was only lvl 2. It required skill, and was not at all based on level. As I've said, levels are about a false sense of superiority.
That must be the only thing i don't "get" about GW2: why didn't ANet make it level-less, like Ultima Online or The Secret World ?
They said that they want to remove grind.
DE are scallable, depending of who join them.
Your level auto-scale if you team with someone with a different level.
They want to scratch the end-game concept, thus there's no difference in content between leveling and max-level players.
They even said that the leveling curve will be linear (ie super fast).
They also want the players to focus on fun and horizontal farming (cosmetic gear, achievements etc.) instead of vertical farming (the mindless stats race)
So what's the point of having 80 levels ?
I could understand having just 20 levels like GW1, because it's a easy way to keep the new players appart and let them get use to the game mechanism with easier content. After a few days they reach 20 and can explore the whole -dangerous- world.
But 80 levels seem like a long way to me (at least 4-6 weeks if you play casual 2h/day).
Reguarding that problem, i've got two questions:
_ What will be the difference between, say, a level 57 and a level 73 ? I mean: pass the first levels when you discover how your class, the combats etc. work, what will you learn more except new spells/skills ?
_ As a low-level, will you be limited to some zones ? Or can you explore everything and creatures will scale with you ?
Part in red: You automatically scale down in level if you go do lower level content, or you can manually sidekick up to another player. Also to answer your question at the end, In PVE you don't automatically scale up to content so there is a zone progression through the world. DEs themselves also have levels. You can unlock more skills and traits throughout the world as you discover them, get access to new areas and higher level gear.
I'm asking sincerely here, people complain about a system with levels, but I've never really been able to see what a system without levels does better or more intuitively. In GW2, you start as a person who hasn't really left your home city and you progress to where you're helping take down elder dragons. Yes, levels might be an artificial way to do that, but they clearly show progression not only in character development, but also in how you move through the world. It's an easy to understand system, like I'm level 29, this is a level 29 event, so I should be ok if I play well.
One of the things too about GW2 is that skills are tied to weapon, and one of the reasons they did this was because they found some people were really terrible at making builds in GW1 and totally gimped themselves. That's something I would definitely be concerned about with a levelless system, where a person put all their skill points or whatever into a suboptimal combination of things. With levels, it's like you can buff some of your four stats (and reassign them), you can go to new zones, maybe find some skill/trait points to improve yourself to add breadth to your abilities without worrying about really screwing up.
I'm serious here. Describe your ideal levelless system and how you envision it as an improvement.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Levels are the simplest and most common way to show progression.
If you take levels away and base progression on something else, then that will just become a different form of levelling.
How can you show progression without advancing?
Unlocking skills? Then skill count will just be the new levels count. Would you rather party with a player who has unlocked five skills or with a player who unlocked thirty skills?
Defeating Bosses? LF Necro lvl15 just becomes LF Necro who has defeated (insert boss name.)
Show progression through discovery? LF player who has explored (insert hard content land.)
In the end you will need to show some form of levelling. It may not be through a number or through rank, but progression will always be there. There is really no need to hide levels and call it something else.
Think of all the games that do not have levels. They either do not have progression at all, or there is just some other way of telling how powerful a player is. Whatever that way is, it is still progression in some form.
Actually they initially planned to make it level-less but then decided against it in order to keep some familiartity for rpg players who have been playing pc rpgs for so long which mostly feature filling up bars and dinging. This is what they actually said, it's in a dev interview from way back but it's too late here for me to bother finding the source.
In essence, first tests with DEs were the reason for adding levels to the game. The players conditioned to hand-holding and "go there" quests were so bewildered with the concept of "do what thou will" that they had no way of knowing whether what they are doing is "right" and it was impossible to easily explain to them that everything is "right" provided thay're having fun. So they added xp and levels to provide this comforting pacifier... "as long as I'm dinging, i'm moving in the "right" direction." GW2 is adding so many novel concepts that they felt that this "ding" thing will give a reassuringly familiar element to the gameplay without compromising other novel features too much. (Though not even that proved enough so they later added scouts to point you in the direction of DEs which are already noted on the map, sigh...)
However, there is such strong a emphasis on sidekicking (or up and down kicking) all over the game, that I really consider GW2 a "stealth" level-less game. Personally, as an old time PnP rpg player i despise and detest level-based rpg systems (we used to laugh at them in the early nineties as old hat, primitive and boring lol) but I'm willing close an eye in GW2's case.
Levels are the simplest and most common way to show progression.
If you take levels away and base progression on something else, then that will just become a different form of levelling.
How can you show progression without advancing?
Unlocking skills? Then skill count will just be the new levels count. Would you rather party with a player who has unlocked five skills or with a player who unlocked thirty skills?
Defeating Bosses? LF Necro lvl15 just becomes LF Necro who has defeated (insert boss name.)
Show progression through discovery? LF player who has explored (insert hard content land.)
In the end you will need to show some form of levelling. It may not be through a number or through rank, but progression will always be there. There is really no need to hide levels and call it something else.
Think of all the games that do not have levels. They either do not have progression at all, or there is just some other way of telling how powerful a player is. Whatever that way is, it is still progression in some form.
Study some old PnP RPG systems which had VASTLY superior and more complex rules for describing characters and their actions than today's rpgs.
Classes and levels were the laughing stock in the PnP RPG scene back in the day... and we used pencils and dice ffs. It pains this old heart to see what is considered the norm in RPGs nowadays.
Of course you have progression in rpgs... but this progression can take so many forms and shapes... It boggles the mind really that nowadays it's all the least common denominator - classes and levels. Instead of allowing greater complexity and richness with their computing power (pencils and dice, remember?) computers actually managed to degrade and retard the RPG system evolution. If you think that WoW retarded the development of MMORPGS, that's nothing compared to what happened to RPGs as a whole.
Levels are the simplest and most common way to show progression.
If you take levels away and base progression on something else, then that will just become a different form of levelling.
How can you show progression without advancing?
Unlocking skills? Then skill count will just be the new levels count. Would you rather party with a player who has unlocked five skills or with a player who unlocked thirty skills?
Defeating Bosses? LF Necro lvl15 just becomes LF Necro who has defeated (insert boss name.)
Show progression through discovery? LF player who has explored (insert hard content land.)
In the end you will need to show some form of levelling. It may not be through a number or through rank, but progression will always be there. There is really no need to hide levels and call it something else.
Think of all the games that do not have levels. They either do not have progression at all, or there is just some other way of telling how powerful a player is. Whatever that way is, it is still progression in some form.
They don't have progression at all then, remember this game is based of skill, not watxhing healthbars.
To obtain skills is the natural order of things. Hopefully, all the skills will be rather simple to obtain, so no big deal there. Also, the person with 30 skills may still have less skill in them than a person with 5.
Bosses again depend on skill. Also, this game is not going to have parties. In dungeons, it is simply dumb to coose a person off of level, I can kill 10,000,000,000,000 chickens I be a higher level without anyone knowing.
Discovery will naturally be happening within this game, as the creators themselves have said. Dynamic events can completely change the layout of a area, so it is impossible to predict accurately the terrain.
So in a game of skill, levels (or any other thing) doesn't matter.
PS It is impossible to not have progression but it be progression. Look at last sentence and you say that.
What? ArenaNet made the levels as irrelevant as possible without actually taking them out. Probably because they think most people would find it too much of a drastic change. When in reality, ArenaNet is molding them for the future, so when levels are finally being taken out of MMOs, it won't be such a big deal to them.
What? ArenaNet made the levels as irrelevant as possible without actually taking them out. Probably because they think most people would find it too much of a drastic change. When in reality, ArenaNet is molding them for the future, so when levels are finally being taken out of MMOs, it won't be such a big deal to them.
EXACTLY> They making based of skill, not off... false security he is a good player.
I wish they would do away with levels and have the characters physically age. Each player would start at age 10 and look older every 10 years they gain. At age 100 they partake on a immortality quest resulting in the option to choose what they will look like for the remainder of the characters stay in the game. Beyond that, they work on skill progression and continue experiencing what the world has to offer. That way they SEE their character progress in it's life and identify more. WE age and have real-life adventures. Our characters should do the same. The extra data needed to have the different age models is not a big deal at all. Just my 2 cents
I absolutely love posts like this. Are people actually that short sighted that they can't see that removing levels isnt going to remove "grind".
I'll give you a lovely example of a game that doesnt have levels. EVE. Guess what, still plenty of grind.
I'll give you another example of why skill based systems aren't any better than level based systems.
You have a sword you want to use. Sword requires either A. Level 20, or B. 100 One handed sword skill.
Now, if it takes you 8 hours of XP'ing to gain level 20, or 8 hours of fighting mobs with 1 handed swords to skill up your one handed sword skill. ITS THE SAME THING. Amazing concept i know.
Just like areas, if the mobs in an area are level 25, you cant reasonably expect to kill them until you're close level 25.
Consequently if the mobs in an area have 160 defense skill vs your weapon skill, you can't reasonably expect to kill those mobs until you've reached a weapon skill close to 160.
See the forest for the trees people.
You can't have an RPG without things like levels, classes, etc. Trying to make an RPG without them doesnt work, as evidenced by literally every single failed game in existence that has tried, single player, multiplayer, mmo, or otherwise.
If you want a level competitive PVP field where levels and gear makes little to no difference, go play an FPS, stop trying to convert a gaming genre which is defined by the very things you hate into something it is. I'm getting really sick of it.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
In older games (like arcade games), you were paced through content by your own skill. If you weren't good enough, you simply couldn't beat the next stage. You had to keep getting better until you could.
However, arcade games required you to start over every time. They weren't persistent.
Spiral Knights is a very good example here, in spite of the fact that they don't have levels. During beta (and earlier), you could play stages (and eventually tiers once they were added) in whatever order you liked. When they finished balancing the difficulty, Tier 3 was so hard that most people couldn't handle it. They had to block people from playing more difficult areas or they would keep bashing their heads against the wall, wasting all of their energy on revives, and giving up entirely. After putting requirements on each tier, people had to play one tier enough (but not so much that it became boring) before accessing the next tier so that it was easier for players to gauge if they were ready for it. A lot of players avoid Tier 3 even though they're more than geared for it because it's just so hard. It's important to teach players how to understand their own capabilities.
GW2 also needs a device to pace players and prevent them from running too far ahead of themselves. In Spiral Knights, this device was your gear, which largely acted as your level. ArenaNet has chosen levels to serve this purpose. They're easy to implement, easy to test, and familiar to players.
Without levels or a similar mechanic, everyone would run for to the hardest content for the biggest rewards, even though they're totally unprepared for it. Levels are a way of easing players into content at a roughly predetermined rate.
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
Originally posted by Hrimnir I absolutely love posts like this. Are people actually that short sighted that they can't see that removing levels isnt going to remove "grind".
...You can't have an RPG without things like levels, classes, etc. Trying to make an RPG without them doesnt work, as evidenced by literally every single failed game in existence that has tried, single player, multiplayer, mmo, or otherwise.
If you want a level competitive PVP field where levels and gear makes little to no difference, go play an FPS, stop trying to convert a gaming genre which is defined by the very things you hate into something it is. I'm getting really sick of it.
Are you actually that short-sighted that you can't see that an RPG without things like levels and classes can work? That's one of the dumbest things I've seen in this entire thread, and there's a lot of dumb being passed around here.
"I absolutely love posts like this." "I'm getting really sick of it."
Speaking of hypocrisy...
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
The sense of progression is nice to have in an MMO. I prefer level based MMO's in general, and I usually quit shortly after getting all my characters to cap in any MMO.
I know for GW1 I could only push myself to 2/3rds of the 1st campaign because it just felt like I was grinding for nothing after I hit level 20, and that IMO is the worse kind of grind. Just feels like im spinning my wheels at that point. This hits me in all level based MMO's, the only ones to pre-occupy me for long periods are ones with tons of levels or make it compelling to reroll alts.
What? ArenaNet made the levels as irrelevant as possible without actually taking them out. Probably because they think most people would find it too much of a drastic change. When in reality, ArenaNet is molding them for the future, so when levels are finally being taken out of MMOs, it won't be such a big deal to them.
I have to agree. Levels is a norm within the mmo space, and considering the amount of changes that they have already made, the game would be too foreign without a leveling system.
At the same time, the leveling system is a wonderful way to dish out content and abilities in a stepping stone manner. Look at Asheron's Call 1. Your level in the game doesn't affect much of what you can do, it acts as a guide to show you what will be easier and harder for your character, content wise. You also obtained skill points at certain levels to help you grow your character.
Levels in GW2 seemingly act more like a general guide, similar to AC1. Granted, you can "sidekick" characters both up and down levels to ensure that friends can always play together regardless of level gaps. PvP is also evened out with everyone being autoleveled in pvp zones.
Recognizable progression tool, used in a game with many unrecognizable elements, at least for general mmo standards.
I get how the scalling will work now: if you're level 1, a level 2 ratman will be challenging and a dragon will be way out of your league. As a level 80, the ratman (scaled up) will be challenging (but easier thanks to all your skills) and the dragon will be a possibility.
But as for a level-less system, well yeah, i think that having just skills that improve with time is a better system because it removed the max-level race. You'll still get a sense of progression each time you learn a new spell, but you won't have to spend days/weeks leveling your third toon just to be able to explore dungeons with a different profession.
Originally posted by BlahTeeb
How can you show progression without advancing?
What about the personnal story ? You could go everywhere, but still have a "main quest" (that may unlock special power/feature) that will drive you through the world.
Anyhow, i'm very glad we're in 2012 so we will soon be able to play GW2 and TSW and -at least- experiment something a little different. In my impatience i dreamed too soon that some dev would merge these two games concepts into a single one ^^
That must be the only thing i don't "get" about GW2: why didn't ANet make it level-less, like Ultima Online or The Secret World ?
Market expectation.
That's it really.
A lot of players tend to spaz when they see a game is 'missing' conventions they are used to so ANet took the clever road of including levels, because pyschologically they are important for many, but at the same time making them redundent
It is my preception that all games that have progression have levels in one form or another, the only real difference is wither or not they tell you about them. I don't believe there can be a truely level-less game system unless (as stated before) everyone is at the same level and never progresses.
I dont like levelling. I wish I had the option in games to skip levelling and start playing a character at max level in bad gear. Then I can explore the world at my pace.
Lots of good discussion on this topic. Thought I might add a point I haven't noticed (though I might've missed). I hope this doesn't come off as overly cynical, but perhaps given that the level cap will be raised in expansions (hope memory is serving me well here), Anet is motivating players to purchase those expansions by making levels highly relevant to this title. Expansions have to factor hugely in Anet's payment model, so it seems logical. Not that there won't be many other reasons to purchase those expansions, mind you.
The sense of progression is nice to have in an MMO. I prefer level based MMO's in general, and I usually quit shortly after getting all my characters to cap in any MMO.
I know for GW1 I could only push myself to 2/3rds of the 1st campaign because it just felt like I was grinding for nothing after I hit level 20, and that IMO is the worse kind of grind. Just feels like im spinning my wheels at that point. This hits me in all level based MMO's, the only ones to pre-occupy me for long periods are ones with tons of levels or make it compelling to reroll alts.
Honestly i think people play mmo like this because they are somehow made to be like this. I'll give you a stupid example. Let say that most modern mmo are based on progression, ok you gather wealth, be it xp or gear. You gather and amass stuff. Well can you be rich in those modern mmo for example? Maybe but being rich isn't really a sensation in those mmo. Yet in some other mmo like Uo where gear were crafted and the same for everyone, and where you could max most character build in few weeks, well you really could get the sensation you are a very rich guy. You could afford pretty much unique and neat items ( a friend of mine had a chair that would make you invisible when you sit on it), rare one, big house full of decoration and so on. You really had the sensation to be rich, yet those game wasn't build at all on amassing wealth. Thats pretty ridiculous in fact when you think about it a sec. And i could really make the same comparison with xp, do you really feel like having some great skill for your character in usual xp grind level game? Not even close.
In fact the progression system in those game is so stiff, thats why you leave once you reach the cap, because there is nothing left to those games once you did that. And the funny part is that they are made solely around this idea, and its probably why they end up like this. Progression mean nothing alone, it end up nowhere. You don't progress to progress, you progress because you want to reach a goal that seam great to you. But in those game they are no goal people want to reach, well i personally don't think having purple gear, and level cap being a goal at least. Being rich and have great skills definitely are goal you would want you character to have, its no its not ewactly the same. In thos modern mmo, its just play, play play everyday the same sequence untill the sequence is finished. How can it be otherwise? people will just leave once they finish.
It is my preception that all games that have progression have levels in one form or another, the only real difference is wither or not they tell you about them. I don't believe there can be a truely level-less game system unless (as stated before) everyone is at the same level and never progresses.
True.
Though there are far better ways to do it than levels.
Levels bring many bad things that can be avoided in other progression systems.
I absolutely love posts like this. Are people actually that short sighted that they can't see that removing levels isnt going to remove "grind".
I'll give you a lovely example of a game that doesnt have levels. EVE. Guess what, still plenty of grind.
I'll give you another example of why skill based systems aren't any better than level based systems.
You have a sword you want to use. Sword requires either A. Level 20, or B. 100 One handed sword skill.
Now, if it takes you 8 hours of XP'ing to gain level 20, or 8 hours of fighting mobs with 1 handed swords to skill up your one handed sword skill. ITS THE SAME THING. Amazing concept i know.
Just like areas, if the mobs in an area are level 25, you cant reasonably expect to kill them until you're close level 25.
Consequently if the mobs in an area have 160 defense skill vs your weapon skill, you can't reasonably expect to kill those mobs until you've reached a weapon skill close to 160.
See the forest for the trees people.
You can't have an RPG without things like levels, classes, etc. Trying to make an RPG without them doesnt work, as evidenced by literally every single failed game in existence that has tried, single player, multiplayer, mmo, or otherwise.
If you want a level competitive PVP field where levels and gear makes little to no difference, go play an FPS, stop trying to convert a gaming genre which is defined by the very things you hate into something it is. I'm getting really sick of it.
You totally missed the point.
Getting rid of levels have NOTHING to do with removing progress or even grind.
That's not why many people want level-less and / or class-less game.
I wish they would do away with levels and have the characters physically age. Each player would start at age 10 and look older every 10 years they gain. At age 100 they partake on a immortality quest resulting in the option to choose what they will look like for the remainder of the characters stay in the game. Beyond that, they work on skill progression and continue experiencing what the world has to offer. That way they SEE their character progress in it's life and identify more. WE age and have real-life adventures. Our characters should do the same. The extra data needed to have the different age models is not a big deal at all. Just my 2 cents
Comments
On the subject of end game content......... When I look at an MMO I feel as if there is no end to the game. Does endgame content mean max level hardest difficulty stuff? GW2 will certainly have that with its dungeons and huge dragon battles. Those game demos you have seen on youtube that were of battles of those bosses were close to endgame. The people playing at the conventions were playing with level 60s to take on these bosses. A level 1 character could probably join in the fight but would be useless since he/she would have low health, lack of skills and traits, and armor values.
Leveling is just a good tie-in to stats and skills. You dont want a low level character learning a powerful skill until he has reached a more appropriate level. You want that sense of "Im getting stronger" feeling and leveling is like a marker of how strong you are.
-I am here to perform logic
Hey, they are still brag rights, or lead up to them (Obsidian armour, as you have said). They simply sperate players from other players, now while you may not be saying it outloud, but you will always compare the lvl 35 to the lvl 1 in you head. It is natural, as is the pride of hitting that "supah high level", and compare yourself to everyone else you pass. It is bragging rights. How easy it is depends on the person. Quite frankly, I don't view "level" as experience, especially in this type of game. In GW HoH, people constantly asked to show you rank, and me having 2 gw accounts, would often be forced to switch even though I've had experience (which I couldn't prove) and was rather good at. Versus Mobs again depends on skill in this game. In a video (total biscuit) I remember him taking on 4 or 5 lvl 3 people while he himself was only lvl 2. It required skill, and was not at all based on level. As I've said, levels are about a false sense of superiority.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
Part in red: You automatically scale down in level if you go do lower level content, or you can manually sidekick up to another player. Also to answer your question at the end, In PVE you don't automatically scale up to content so there is a zone progression through the world. DEs themselves also have levels. You can unlock more skills and traits throughout the world as you discover them, get access to new areas and higher level gear.
I'm asking sincerely here, people complain about a system with levels, but I've never really been able to see what a system without levels does better or more intuitively. In GW2, you start as a person who hasn't really left your home city and you progress to where you're helping take down elder dragons. Yes, levels might be an artificial way to do that, but they clearly show progression not only in character development, but also in how you move through the world. It's an easy to understand system, like I'm level 29, this is a level 29 event, so I should be ok if I play well.
One of the things too about GW2 is that skills are tied to weapon, and one of the reasons they did this was because they found some people were really terrible at making builds in GW1 and totally gimped themselves. That's something I would definitely be concerned about with a levelless system, where a person put all their skill points or whatever into a suboptimal combination of things. With levels, it's like you can buff some of your four stats (and reassign them), you can go to new zones, maybe find some skill/trait points to improve yourself to add breadth to your abilities without worrying about really screwing up.
I'm serious here. Describe your ideal levelless system and how you envision it as an improvement.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Levels are the simplest and most common way to show progression.
If you take levels away and base progression on something else, then that will just become a different form of levelling.
How can you show progression without advancing?
Unlocking skills? Then skill count will just be the new levels count. Would you rather party with a player who has unlocked five skills or with a player who unlocked thirty skills?
Defeating Bosses? LF Necro lvl15 just becomes LF Necro who has defeated (insert boss name.)
Show progression through discovery? LF player who has explored (insert hard content land.)
In the end you will need to show some form of levelling. It may not be through a number or through rank, but progression will always be there. There is really no need to hide levels and call it something else.
Think of all the games that do not have levels. They either do not have progression at all, or there is just some other way of telling how powerful a player is. Whatever that way is, it is still progression in some form.
Actually they initially planned to make it level-less but then decided against it in order to keep some familiartity for rpg players who have been playing pc rpgs for so long which mostly feature filling up bars and dinging. This is what they actually said, it's in a dev interview from way back but it's too late here for me to bother finding the source.
In essence, first tests with DEs were the reason for adding levels to the game. The players conditioned to hand-holding and "go there" quests were so bewildered with the concept of "do what thou will" that they had no way of knowing whether what they are doing is "right" and it was impossible to easily explain to them that everything is "right" provided thay're having fun. So they added xp and levels to provide this comforting pacifier... "as long as I'm dinging, i'm moving in the "right" direction." GW2 is adding so many novel concepts that they felt that this "ding" thing will give a reassuringly familiar element to the gameplay without compromising other novel features too much. (Though not even that proved enough so they later added scouts to point you in the direction of DEs which are already noted on the map, sigh...)
However, there is such strong a emphasis on sidekicking (or up and down kicking) all over the game, that I really consider GW2 a "stealth" level-less game. Personally, as an old time PnP rpg player i despise and detest level-based rpg systems (we used to laugh at them in the early nineties as old hat, primitive and boring lol) but I'm willing close an eye in GW2's case.
Study some old PnP RPG systems which had VASTLY superior and more complex rules for describing characters and their actions than today's rpgs.
Classes and levels were the laughing stock in the PnP RPG scene back in the day... and we used pencils and dice ffs. It pains this old heart to see what is considered the norm in RPGs nowadays.
Of course you have progression in rpgs... but this progression can take so many forms and shapes... It boggles the mind really that nowadays it's all the least common denominator - classes and levels. Instead of allowing greater complexity and richness with their computing power (pencils and dice, remember?) computers actually managed to degrade and retard the RPG system evolution. If you think that WoW retarded the development of MMORPGS, that's nothing compared to what happened to RPGs as a whole.
Simple enough
Because if it had not there would be many people crying
"OH BUT THIS IS NOT AN RPG AT ALL THEM, THERE IS NO PROGRESSION Q.Q!!!111!!!11!'
"It has potential"
-Second most used phrase on existence
"It sucks"
-Most used phrase on existence
They don't have progression at all then, remember this game is based of skill, not watxhing healthbars.
To obtain skills is the natural order of things. Hopefully, all the skills will be rather simple to obtain, so no big deal there. Also, the person with 30 skills may still have less skill in them than a person with 5.
Bosses again depend on skill. Also, this game is not going to have parties. In dungeons, it is simply dumb to coose a person off of level, I can kill 10,000,000,000,000 chickens I be a higher level without anyone knowing.
Discovery will naturally be happening within this game, as the creators themselves have said. Dynamic events can completely change the layout of a area, so it is impossible to predict accurately the terrain.
So in a game of skill, levels (or any other thing) doesn't matter.
PS It is impossible to not have progression but it be progression. Look at last sentence and you say that.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
What? ArenaNet made the levels as irrelevant as possible without actually taking them out. Probably because they think most people would find it too much of a drastic change. When in reality, ArenaNet is molding them for the future, so when levels are finally being taken out of MMOs, it won't be such a big deal to them.
EXACTLY> They making based of skill, not off... false security he is a good player.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation
The extra data needed to have the different age models is not a big deal at all.
Just my 2 cents
I absolutely love posts like this. Are people actually that short sighted that they can't see that removing levels isnt going to remove "grind".
I'll give you a lovely example of a game that doesnt have levels. EVE. Guess what, still plenty of grind.
I'll give you another example of why skill based systems aren't any better than level based systems.
You have a sword you want to use. Sword requires either A. Level 20, or B. 100 One handed sword skill.
Now, if it takes you 8 hours of XP'ing to gain level 20, or 8 hours of fighting mobs with 1 handed swords to skill up your one handed sword skill. ITS THE SAME THING. Amazing concept i know.
Just like areas, if the mobs in an area are level 25, you cant reasonably expect to kill them until you're close level 25.
Consequently if the mobs in an area have 160 defense skill vs your weapon skill, you can't reasonably expect to kill those mobs until you've reached a weapon skill close to 160.
See the forest for the trees people.
You can't have an RPG without things like levels, classes, etc. Trying to make an RPG without them doesnt work, as evidenced by literally every single failed game in existence that has tried, single player, multiplayer, mmo, or otherwise.
If you want a level competitive PVP field where levels and gear makes little to no difference, go play an FPS, stop trying to convert a gaming genre which is defined by the very things you hate into something it is. I'm getting really sick of it.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
Levels are a way of pacing content.
In older games (like arcade games), you were paced through content by your own skill. If you weren't good enough, you simply couldn't beat the next stage. You had to keep getting better until you could.
However, arcade games required you to start over every time. They weren't persistent.
Spiral Knights is a very good example here, in spite of the fact that they don't have levels. During beta (and earlier), you could play stages (and eventually tiers once they were added) in whatever order you liked. When they finished balancing the difficulty, Tier 3 was so hard that most people couldn't handle it. They had to block people from playing more difficult areas or they would keep bashing their heads against the wall, wasting all of their energy on revives, and giving up entirely. After putting requirements on each tier, people had to play one tier enough (but not so much that it became boring) before accessing the next tier so that it was easier for players to gauge if they were ready for it. A lot of players avoid Tier 3 even though they're more than geared for it because it's just so hard. It's important to teach players how to understand their own capabilities.
GW2 also needs a device to pace players and prevent them from running too far ahead of themselves. In Spiral Knights, this device was your gear, which largely acted as your level. ArenaNet has chosen levels to serve this purpose. They're easy to implement, easy to test, and familiar to players.
Without levels or a similar mechanic, everyone would run for to the hardest content for the biggest rewards, even though they're totally unprepared for it. Levels are a way of easing players into content at a roughly predetermined rate.
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
Are you actually that short-sighted that you can't see that an RPG without things like levels and classes can work? That's one of the dumbest things I've seen in this entire thread, and there's a lot of dumb being passed around here.
"I absolutely love posts like this."
"I'm getting really sick of it."
Speaking of hypocrisy...
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss
The sense of progression is nice to have in an MMO. I prefer level based MMO's in general, and I usually quit shortly after getting all my characters to cap in any MMO.
I know for GW1 I could only push myself to 2/3rds of the 1st campaign because it just felt like I was grinding for nothing after I hit level 20, and that IMO is the worse kind of grind. Just feels like im spinning my wheels at that point. This hits me in all level based MMO's, the only ones to pre-occupy me for long periods are ones with tons of levels or make it compelling to reroll alts.
I have to agree. Levels is a norm within the mmo space, and considering the amount of changes that they have already made, the game would be too foreign without a leveling system.
At the same time, the leveling system is a wonderful way to dish out content and abilities in a stepping stone manner. Look at Asheron's Call 1. Your level in the game doesn't affect much of what you can do, it acts as a guide to show you what will be easier and harder for your character, content wise. You also obtained skill points at certain levels to help you grow your character.
Levels in GW2 seemingly act more like a general guide, similar to AC1. Granted, you can "sidekick" characters both up and down levels to ensure that friends can always play together regardless of level gaps. PvP is also evened out with everyone being autoleveled in pvp zones.
Recognizable progression tool, used in a game with many unrecognizable elements, at least for general mmo standards.
Thanks for all the interesting feedback !
I get how the scalling will work now: if you're level 1, a level 2 ratman will be challenging and a dragon will be way out of your league. As a level 80, the ratman (scaled up) will be challenging (but easier thanks to all your skills) and the dragon will be a possibility.
But as for a level-less system, well yeah, i think that having just skills that improve with time is a better system because it removed the max-level race. You'll still get a sense of progression each time you learn a new spell, but you won't have to spend days/weeks leveling your third toon just to be able to explore dungeons with a different profession.
What about the personnal story ? You could go everywhere, but still have a "main quest" (that may unlock special power/feature) that will drive you through the world.
Anyhow, i'm very glad we're in 2012 so we will soon be able to play GW2 and TSW and -at least- experiment something a little different. In my impatience i dreamed too soon that some dev would merge these two games concepts into a single one ^^
Market expectation.
That's it really.
A lot of players tend to spaz when they see a game is 'missing' conventions they are used to so ANet took the clever road of including levels, because pyschologically they are important for many, but at the same time making them redundent
It is my preception that all games that have progression have levels in one form or another, the only real difference is wither or not they tell you about them. I don't believe there can be a truely level-less game system unless (as stated before) everyone is at the same level and never progresses.
I dont like levelling. I wish I had the option in games to skip levelling and start playing a character at max level in bad gear. Then I can explore the world at my pace.
Its just a ploy to get extra weeks of subbing.
Lots of good discussion on this topic. Thought I might add a point I haven't noticed (though I might've missed). I hope this doesn't come off as overly cynical, but perhaps given that the level cap will be raised in expansions (hope memory is serving me well here), Anet is motivating players to purchase those expansions by making levels highly relevant to this title. Expansions have to factor hugely in Anet's payment model, so it seems logical. Not that there won't be many other reasons to purchase those expansions, mind you.
Honestly i think people play mmo like this because they are somehow made to be like this. I'll give you a stupid example. Let say that most modern mmo are based on progression, ok you gather wealth, be it xp or gear. You gather and amass stuff. Well can you be rich in those modern mmo for example? Maybe but being rich isn't really a sensation in those mmo. Yet in some other mmo like Uo where gear were crafted and the same for everyone, and where you could max most character build in few weeks, well you really could get the sensation you are a very rich guy. You could afford pretty much unique and neat items ( a friend of mine had a chair that would make you invisible when you sit on it), rare one, big house full of decoration and so on. You really had the sensation to be rich, yet those game wasn't build at all on amassing wealth. Thats pretty ridiculous in fact when you think about it a sec. And i could really make the same comparison with xp, do you really feel like having some great skill for your character in usual xp grind level game? Not even close.
In fact the progression system in those game is so stiff, thats why you leave once you reach the cap, because there is nothing left to those games once you did that. And the funny part is that they are made solely around this idea, and its probably why they end up like this. Progression mean nothing alone, it end up nowhere. You don't progress to progress, you progress because you want to reach a goal that seam great to you. But in those game they are no goal people want to reach, well i personally don't think having purple gear, and level cap being a goal at least. Being rich and have great skills definitely are goal you would want you character to have, its no its not ewactly the same. In thos modern mmo, its just play, play play everyday the same sequence untill the sequence is finished. How can it be otherwise? people will just leave once they finish.
True.
Though there are far better ways to do it than levels.
Levels bring many bad things that can be avoided in other progression systems.
You totally missed the point.
Getting rid of levels have NOTHING to do with removing progress or even grind.
That's not why many people want level-less and / or class-less game.
That would be wickeeeeedd!!