I don't mind having levels as means of keeping track of progress but unfortunately in most MMOs levels also have negative side effects.
Such as, preventing you from wearing decent looking gear until certain level, making you completely underpowered to higher level players (due to low gear stats) regardless of your skills, having most content inaccessible until certain level and so on.
Somehow I think Anet is aware of these side effects seeing their plans on implementing level scaling and gear custmoization so I'm not concerned about it.
I heard that they had considered not even having levels, or even keeping the level cap at 20, like GW1. I think it's mostly psycological. They wanted gamers to feel like they are progressing and also wanted to make the game appeal to the broader MMO audience, who are used to levels. Obviously levels won't mean the same thing in GW2 as it does in other MMO's and hitting level 80 clearly won't stop progression. I'm pretty sure it's mostly cosmetic and not the true standard in which to measure progression in GW2.
Why didn't they create a difference with the sole purpose of being different?
Hmm, that's a tough one.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I'm going to go into this one expecting very little. I do recall all the hype surrounding GW1 prior to launch and in the end, the game was a bit shallow and repetitive after a week or so. I'm expecting similar for this one, so don't overhype something which is sure to disappoint many.
Never be positive about anything on the off-chance that some random forum reader might be offended. Right, got it.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I'm going to go into this one expecting very little. I do recall all the hype surrounding GW1 prior to launch and in the end, the game was a bit shallow and repetitive after a week or so. I'm expecting similar for this one, so don't overhype something which is sure to disappoint many.
Hmm, you just described GW1 with the two words that actually describe every MMO released in the past decade.
Seriously though, this is the problem I have with the MMO community. When there's a developer who's actually creating something different, there's skepticism, but then you have other MMOs which those same people get excited over that's pretty much just like every other MMO they played in the past 10 years. The MMO community is full of contradicting hypocrites that wouldn't know a good game if it was dating their mother for a year.
By your logic, I'll just say GW1 defied the current MMO industry. GW2 will do the same. Same philosophy, different way of achieving it.
I'm going to go into this one expecting very little. I do recall all the hype surrounding GW1 prior to launch and in the end, the game was a bit shallow and repetitive after a week or so. I'm expecting similar for this one, so don't overhype something which is sure to disappoint many.
I wouldn't call GW1 shallow (don't know what exactly you're speaking to here) but I agree it can be repetitive. There's only one big storyline per campaign, so making another alt can be a little painful if you don't like the first class you picked.
That, coupled with the non-linearity of the game and the other things to do (hearts, activities, WvW) I think will go a long way towards keeping it fresh.
In general it's good to be skeptical. Until we have the game in our hands, we truly don't know whether it will deliver. If you feel that you were disappointed by GW1, by all means wait for reviews, wait for a month to see how people feel after the honeymoon phase is over, try to get a free trial. As long as you're keeping an open mind and realizing GW2 isn't the same game as GW1, then that's totally cool.
One thing I will say though is that it seems like ArenaNet is very much aware of the failures of previous MMOs. They know they only have one chance to capture the audience and that's why they're taking this long to polish it and to try not to promise things they aren't going to deliver on. While some people might have overhyped themselves, I think people who do a lot of research into the game and watch the extensive demo footage will have a very good idea what to expect.
"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
Could a moderator please remove this post? I am new to this site and did not post this in the manner I had wanted and cannot find a way to remove this post myself.
Because a lot of people want to numerically track their progress through the game (which has nothing to do with player skill).
In GW1 20 levels was not enough for many, in GW2 it will be enough, but they haven't changed the design of the game. Like in GW1, all the content of GW2 is endgame.
Give ranks according to the type of player you are. Color is pve/pvp/dungeons or a combination and the name of the title says how far you are. for example Commander Powermike. I think that would be really nice! Maybe add some emblem or badge.
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 ?
to give u a sense of accomplishment which is the psychological goal of EVERY mmo, doesn't matter their pay style if they can make you feel like you've accomplished something in their game they can keep you as a player/customer for longer. Simple economical model really. That's why there's a ding every time you level and there are achievements and goals to accomplish in every game. It makes the player feel like they have accomplished something while having fun.
Levels also limit you from say going to a zone you don't belong in, and getting killed instantly by level 80 mobs. thus keeping you on track in the zones you can go into as say a level 10. They said one of the achievements they wanted was to give you a title if you killed mobs higher level then you are.
And no, you only scale backwards in open world when going back to lands that were lower level then you are so you can be a level 80 and help your level 4 friend out who's just joined the game and no totally ruin it for them by destroying everything in one shot.
Give ranks according to the type of player you are. Color is pve/pvp/dungeons or a combination and the name of the title says how far you are. for example Commander Powermike. I think that would be really nice! Maybe add some emblem or badge.
I bet they already plan to do something like that, with the titles.
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 ?
to give u a sense of accomplishment which is the psychological goal of EVERY mmo, doesn't matter their pay style if they can make you feel like you've accomplished something in their game they can keep you as a player/customer for longer. Simple economical model really. That's why there's a ding every time you level and there are achievements and goals to accomplish in every game. It makes the player feel like they have accomplished something while having fun.
Levels also limit you from say going to a zone you don't belong in, and getting killed instantly by level 80 mobs. thus keeping you on track in the zones you can go into as say a level 10. They said one of the achievements they wanted was to give you a title if you killed mobs higher level then you are.
And no, you only scale backwards in open world when going back to lands that were lower level then you are so you can be a level 80 and help your level 4 friend out who's just joined the game and no totally ruin it for them by destroying everything in one shot.
Yeah but it destroys the link with the actual contents. For example you may be level 30, but what have you actually done? The talk will become more about level and less about contents.
Back in the vanilla wow days at level 60 people talked a lot about "having done blackrock spire, zul gurub, molten core". The more people talk about a dungeon, the more it becomes mystic and attractive.
What would be really nice is if you can level with titles. For example after the first dungeon you get the first title, but if you have done the first 5 dungeons you would get a special title for it. Or if you only have done pvp or a combination of both you may get some title as well, or a reward or whatever fits. The point is also that people should have to make effort to find out which dungeons are good enough instead of just being able to ask someone a level range. I have to say that even though GW2 makes some major changes, I see the abolishment of level as the next thing talked about in GW2 and perhaps being implemented some time .
Comments
I don't mind having levels as means of keeping track of progress but unfortunately in most MMOs levels also have negative side effects.
Such as, preventing you from wearing decent looking gear until certain level, making you completely underpowered to higher level players (due to low gear stats) regardless of your skills, having most content inaccessible until certain level and so on.
Somehow I think Anet is aware of these side effects seeing their plans on implementing level scaling and gear custmoization so I'm not concerned about it.
I heard that they had considered not even having levels, or even keeping the level cap at 20, like GW1. I think it's mostly psycological. They wanted gamers to feel like they are progressing and also wanted to make the game appeal to the broader MMO audience, who are used to levels. Obviously levels won't mean the same thing in GW2 as it does in other MMO's and hitting level 80 clearly won't stop progression. I'm pretty sure it's mostly cosmetic and not the true standard in which to measure progression in GW2.
It's dumbed down like every other AAA title. Face it.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
How is Guild Wars 2 dumbed down like every other AAA title? Dumbed down to what? Can you give an example? Can you elaborate what you mean by this?
Yes, because it's not EvE/Darkfall/Archeage etc. etc. etc. right?
Move on.
GW2 is suppose to be a very casual game. Don't like it? Play something else...
Casual does not = dumbed down.
Guild Wars 2 will be innovative just like SWTOR was. You get spoon fed all this marketing BS and you all just eat it up.
"I am not in a server with Gankers...THEY ARE IN A SERVER WITH ME!!!"
this and many other mmos outhere aswell one we all know tend to have either 50 or 80 level cap.
Why didn't they create a difference with the sole purpose of being different?
Hmm, that's a tough one.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
I'm going to go into this one expecting very little. I do recall all the hype surrounding GW1 prior to launch and in the end, the game was a bit shallow and repetitive after a week or so. I'm expecting similar for this one, so don't overhype something which is sure to disappoint many.
Never be positive about anything on the off-chance that some random forum reader might be offended. Right, got it.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
Hmm, you just described GW1 with the two words that actually describe every MMO released in the past decade.
Seriously though, this is the problem I have with the MMO community. When there's a developer who's actually creating something different, there's skepticism, but then you have other MMOs which those same people get excited over that's pretty much just like every other MMO they played in the past 10 years. The MMO community is full of contradicting hypocrites that wouldn't know a good game if it was dating their mother for a year.
By your logic, I'll just say GW1 defied the current MMO industry. GW2 will do the same. Same philosophy, different way of achieving it.
I wouldn't call GW1 shallow (don't know what exactly you're speaking to here) but I agree it can be repetitive. There's only one big storyline per campaign, so making another alt can be a little painful if you don't like the first class you picked.
The thing with GW2 though is that their team is a lot bigger. They've said that GW2 is bigger than all the GW1 campaigns combined, with 270 people working on it compared to their original 60 for GW1. http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2011/09/27/guild-wars-2-developer-interview/3
That, coupled with the non-linearity of the game and the other things to do (hearts, activities, WvW) I think will go a long way towards keeping it fresh.
In general it's good to be skeptical. Until we have the game in our hands, we truly don't know whether it will deliver. If you feel that you were disappointed by GW1, by all means wait for reviews, wait for a month to see how people feel after the honeymoon phase is over, try to get a free trial. As long as you're keeping an open mind and realizing GW2 isn't the same game as GW1, then that's totally cool.
One thing I will say though is that it seems like ArenaNet is very much aware of the failures of previous MMOs. They know they only have one chance to capture the audience and that's why they're taking this long to polish it and to try not to promise things they aren't going to deliver on. While some people might have overhyped themselves, I think people who do a lot of research into the game and watch the extensive demo footage will have a very good idea what to expect.
"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
Could a moderator please remove this post? I am new to these forums and failed to post the way I wanted, and I cannot find a way to remove the post.
Could a moderator please remove this post? I am new to this site and did not post this in the manner I had wanted and cannot find a way to remove this post myself.
Because a lot of people want to numerically track their progress through the game (which has nothing to do with player skill).
In GW1 20 levels was not enough for many, in GW2 it will be enough, but they haven't changed the design of the game. Like in GW1, all the content of GW2 is endgame.
Give ranks according to the type of player you are. Color is pve/pvp/dungeons or a combination and the name of the title says how far you are. for example Commander Powermike. I think that would be really nice! Maybe add some emblem or badge.
to give u a sense of accomplishment which is the psychological goal of EVERY mmo, doesn't matter their pay style if they can make you feel like you've accomplished something in their game they can keep you as a player/customer for longer. Simple economical model really. That's why there's a ding every time you level and there are achievements and goals to accomplish in every game. It makes the player feel like they have accomplished something while having fun.
Levels also limit you from say going to a zone you don't belong in, and getting killed instantly by level 80 mobs. thus keeping you on track in the zones you can go into as say a level 10. They said one of the achievements they wanted was to give you a title if you killed mobs higher level then you are.
And no, you only scale backwards in open world when going back to lands that were lower level then you are so you can be a level 80 and help your level 4 friend out who's just joined the game and no totally ruin it for them by destroying everything in one shot.
I bet they already plan to do something like that, with the titles.
Yeah but it destroys the link with the actual contents. For example you may be level 30, but what have you actually done? The talk will become more about level and less about contents.
Back in the vanilla wow days at level 60 people talked a lot about "having done blackrock spire, zul gurub, molten core". The more people talk about a dungeon, the more it becomes mystic and attractive.
What would be really nice is if you can level with titles. For example after the first dungeon you get the first title, but if you have done the first 5 dungeons you would get a special title for it. Or if you only have done pvp or a combination of both you may get some title as well, or a reward or whatever fits. The point is also that people should have to make effort to find out which dungeons are good enough instead of just being able to ask someone a level range. I have to say that even though GW2 makes some major changes, I see the abolishment of level as the next thing talked about in GW2 and perhaps being implemented some time
.